I've only been a member for a few days, but it seems like a lot of the discussions are centered around religion and the belief of a God. I figured i'd better go ahead and drop the bomb, and get it out of the way, because people will find out eventually. I am a Mormon. That is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. And for people who say we are not Christians, please look at the official title of our church. Now, let me make it clear that I am in no way, shape, or form ashamed of my religion. I love my church, and I know with all of my heart that it's true. However, as soon as people learn that i'm Mormon, they usually either start attacking what I believe in (or rather, what they THINK I believe in) or they suddenly stop talking to me. I will attempt to straighten out a few misconceptions about Mormons, and if anyone has any other questions, please feel free to ask. And yes, you can even attack me on what I believe, tell me i'm going to hell, or attempt to save my eternal soul. And thats perfectly alright. However, I will not respond to irrational rantings of that sort. If you have a valid question or statement to make, I will most definitly respond to the best of my ability. Thank you. =D
-We do not have plural mairrage. At the very beginning of the church, it's true that we did. This was sort of the same thing as Adam and Eve did, a "multiply and replinish the earth" sort of a thing. This built up the church. You don't have to believe in it, and I certainly do not condone plural mairrage. Anywho, we definitly do not do that anymore.
-We do not believe that people in every other religion are going to hell. It's true that most religions have some form of the truth. They believe in God, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. They believe in the Bible and teach from it. However, man has corrupted most of the truth. We believe that ours is the only one with the complete truth.
-We can eat chocolate. I don't know where the heck this came from, but i've heard it more than once. Therefore, it is worth addressing.
-We don't wear all black, and we can use electricity. That's the AMISH people. Omish are NOT mormons.
-We don't have our own Bible. We do, however, have the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith translated it (with the help of God, of course). For us, it's another testament of Jesus Christ (It even says that on the title page.) We believe that both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are true, and we use both to illustrate our teachings. It's pretty amazing how the Book of Mormon fits in with EVERYTHING that the Bible teaches! I would def. recommend reading it, even if you don't believe in God or are an active member of another church just because it's pretty sweet reading. It has tribes fighting against each other and stuff. Pretty exciting. =D
-We do believe that God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three separate beings. This is apparent in many instances in the Bible, one of the most famous being when Jesus was baptized and God opened up the heavens and said "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased". Why would Jesus/God talk to himself? And then, of course, the Holy Spirit decended on him in the form of a dove. chyeah, totally seperate.
-We believe in modern revelation. We also have a living prophet on the earth. Times change, and sometimes new beliefs must be adressed. For instance, abortion was not in issue back in Jesus's time. Joseph Smith's congregation did not have to worry about miniskirts and hoochie mama clothes. It is for this reason that a prophet is on the earth today, in direct connection with God.
-We believe in three "degrees" of heaven. Now this is one of the things that makes the most sense to me, and to many people who have converted over to mormonism. So most people believe that there is heaven, and hell. Where is the line? How does God decide if you're going to heaven or hell? Does it make sense that someone who is in hell for stealing a car would be in the same place as Hitler? Conversely, does it make sense that someone who barely made it into heaven and who has a committed a good many sins is in the same place as Mother Teresa or Ghandi? If so, what is the point of trying to be the best that you can be, if you can make it into heaven by just getting by? We have the celestial, the highest degree, the terrestial, the middle, and the telestial, the lowest. Then we have what we call "outer darkness". We also believe that unless you're in outer darkness, you can progress upward, even while you're in the next life.
-We do not believe in the whole "being saved" concept. James 2:20 states that "faith without works is dead". Does it make sense that a mass murderer can go to heaven just because they've been saved? We believe that you have to keep the commandments of God and repent of your sins. Being baptized, or "saved" or whatever is not a get out of jail free card. You have to work at it and be rightous to get back to God.
-"We believe that man will be punished for their OWN sins, and not for Adam's transgression." That pretty much sums it up. We don't believe in original sin. Jesus atoned for all of our sins, including Adam's.
-We believe in eternal mairrage. When we get married in the temple, it is not "till death do you part". When you are married in the temple, you are married for time and all eternity. We also believe that families are eternal, and are sealed together. It's really a beautiful and remarkably romantic thing. If you are married to someone who you love more than yourself, someone who you care about more that anything, would you really want to part with them at death?
I can't exactly think of any more, but like I said before. Please comment and ask questions, I will gladly answer them. Also, i'm not trying to force my beliefs on anyone, and I hope that it does not look that way. I am simply here to inform. =D
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
This was a well thought out blog, I heard somewhere that Mormon was a derogatory term? I have no idea if this is true or not, I would assume it's not if you're using it to describe yourself, but I'm just wondering.
As for the whole chocolate thing I think people assume that since some chocolate has caffeine that Mormons don't eat it.
And it's *Amish* ;)
`lacey
There are no beautiful surfaces without terrible depth...
Well, it actually is. We're not supposed to use it, it's just what everyone else calls us. And it's alot easier to type out Mormon than "member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints"!
And thanks for the spelling error catch. =]
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
I don't think that we are really supposed to say "Mormon", but it isn't like "you aren't allowed to" or "it's a swear-word" or anything. Anyhow, you can just say LDS (not LSD) for short. I use it all the time. BTW: Yes, I am also Mormon... I mean, uh... LDS. *ahem*
Also, the caffine thing about chocolate is true. Some people think that we can't have it because of the caffine. This isn't true, but I am really not sure why. Chocolate does have caffine and we aren't supposed to eat or drink it. However, though I'm not sure why, we have been told that it is fine to eat chocolate. Go figure.
(I, for one, am a chocoholic. Hehe)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am insane, mad, crazy and any other adjectives synonymous to mental illness.
~Sethorion~
I don't understand why you would depend on someone else to tell you what to eat.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
"Mormon" was originally applied to Church members as a slur by non-members, just as non-believers referred to Jesus's followers as Christians in a derogatory way. In time the offesive edge was lost. Recently though, the Church has stressed the name it was given by the Lord in revelation, in order to avoid confusion. We are not the church of Mormon or anyone else, but the Church of Jesus Christ. And just as church members were referred to as saints in apostolic times, we are the saints of Christ's Church in these latter days.
Hope that helps you understand.
Hermano Pablo el Camba
As Mormon, you have to admit, that your beliefs greatly differ than mainstream Christianity. Myself, I am a regular non-denominational Christian. I am not religous, I do not attend church on Sundays, and like every other person out there, I'm a borned sinner and will probably die a sinner. I have many friends that are ex-mormons, and many family members who are mormons and ex-mormons. Now for some reason, many of ex-mormon family members are shunned by my mormon family members for no other reasons other than being labled apostates.
I actually headed to the LDS church here in Laie on Oahu to have a taste of the Mormon Church. LIke your testimony here, every testimony began with the saying. "I love my church, and I know with all of my heart that it's true. " To be quite honest, I found this strange. I saw members with tears rolling down their face crying that they new the church had to be true. It sounded like broken record.
I was then approached by a few people, then missionaries were sent to my house a few days later to teach me about Joseph Smith. I did my research into the Mormon religion and asked the two gentlemen about the Church's beliefs. My main belief was the main contradiction in the Bible. In the Bible, it writes about one god. That there is only one, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and End, and Mormonism preaches about many Gods. It also preaches about how man can become a God of his own universe. And while the church didn't believe in polygamy, it did believe in a celestial polygamy. The missionaries skirted answering my questions, saying, milk before the meat or something like that, and pushed me to get baptised soon. I learned more about the religon from my exmormon friends and family, and well...
Lets just say I'm fine with whatever you believe. But to go around calling it Christianity is not right. Satan was not the brother of Jesus. There is not Planet Kolab in the BIble Where does it say in the Bible that I have to get married, learn secret handshakes, in order to get into the celestial kingdom. I don't think the type of underwear plays a role in my salvation either. My mormon family members believe it does...and yes, all the power to them. This though, is not Christian.
Christianity, if defined by the Bible, is purely sinners who have accepted that Jesus is their God, died on the cross for their sins. No matter what they do, they'll be saved. Murderers wll be saved. Paul was a murderer of Jews, remember?
With this, I leave you with a website... www.exmormon.org I learned a lot on there.
I am sorry to hear about your bad experiences with Mormanism, but I must disagree with many things that you said:
For one, I have broken down crying in testimony meetings as well. It is not, however, because I was sad, but because I was happy. That may sound odd, but look at it this way: If you lived your whole life doing horrible things and then you suddenly find out that you can be forgiven than what would you do when you went to tell other people about it? You would be happy, right?
There comes a point when a certain level of joy cannot be expressed by just smiling. I know what that feels like: you start to cry. Other people have felt this: At weddings, Mothers will sometimes cry, not because they are sad, but because they are happy for their child. If you ask them about it than they will likely agree with me.
We do not beleive in more than one God. We believe that God rules in heaven and has Heavenly Messangers such as the Holy Ghost. I think that you have gotten the conception of the "God-head" mixed up and thought that it meant that we believed in multiple gods. It does not. Our Father in Heaven is the only true God and His son, Jesus Christ, is his literal son. The Holy Ghost is one of God's Heavenly Messangers.
These three Beings are what we call the God-head. They are, in fact, three separate beings with varying degrees of power.
As for every man dying and suddenly becoming a god: I wouldn't put it that way, but it is a confusing subject that I know very little about, so I'm not the right person to explain that.
Lucifer wasn't the brother of Christ? Who says? Why not?
Many adult Christian believers refer to one another as "Brothers" and "Sisters" because they believe, as do I, that we were all brothers and sisters in heaven, including Christ.
So, if Satan didn't begin as the brother of Christ than who is he? As a matter of fact: Who is he period?
About the underwear and secret handshakes thing: I have no idea where you got that from so don't hold me to it please...
Getting Married however has to do with one of the commandments that God gave to us in the beginning; we were told to "Multiply and replenish the earth." If you can't get married for a legit reason than there is an exception, but otherwise it is a commandment.
I apologize if your family member Mormans shun you and the other "apostates", as you said, but I am sure that you are just taking it the wrong way. I do not know any other Latter-day-saints that shun members of other religions except one. (His name is daniel and he's only joking about hating Jews)
I respect and listen to the beliefs of all other people and apologize once again for any bad examples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day-saints that you may have encountered.
If there are any other questions that you have for me than I will be glad to answer them.
I am insane, mad, crazy and any other adjectives synonymous to mental illness.
~Sethorion~
We do not beleive in more than one God. We believe that God rules in heaven and has Heavenly Messangers such as the Holy Ghost. I think that you have gotten the conception of the "God-head" mixed up and thought that it meant that we believed in multiple gods. It does not. Our Father in Heaven is the only true God and His son, Jesus Christ, is his literal son. The Holy Ghost is one of God's Heavenly Messangers.
These three Beings are what we call the God-head. They are, in fact, three separate beings with varying degrees of power.
According to Joseph Smith Jr., Brigham Young and all of those throughout the history of the LDS church, they taught the plurality of gods and that each member of the "Mormon" godhead is a separate person in being and nature each with a physical body save the Holy Ghost of course. At best this would be "tritheism" and not the Biblical understanding of the Godhead.
The Father is a resurrected man with a physical body. Christ is a separate resurrected man with a physical body. The Holy Ghost is a separate man/god with a spiritual body, he is different from the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is the influence from the Father and is not personal. The three are totally separate gods. Jesus is the spirit brother of Satan (Lucifer) sons of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother who lived on the planet Kolab.
Lucifer wasn't the brother of Christ? Who says? Why not?
Many adult Christian believers refer to one another as "Brothers" and "Sisters" because they believe, as do I, that we were all brothers and sisters in heaven, including Christ.
So, if Satan didn't begin as the brother of Christ than who is he? As a matter of fact: Who is he period?
Well the Bible is clear that Jesus created everything, that would include Lucifer/Satan.
Colossians 1:16-17 "He created all things, in heaven or on earth, and it is he that hold them together"
John 1:1-5 "Jesus eternally existed, and was the Creator and without him nothing was made"
John 8:58 the Greek here reads nicely, "Before Abraham sprang into existence, I am eternal God"
So with this couple verses the Bible shows that Jesus created all, that all would include Lucifer/Satan, Adam, you, me, everything. This is why they can't be "brother"
Satan is a created being, an angel who sot to raise himself to the equal of God. (Isaiah 14:12, 13, 2 Peter 2:4, Jude 6)
About the underwear and secret handshakes thing: I have no idea where you got that from so don't hold me to it please...
Maybe you haven't received a Temple recommend yet, but if you live in Utah, go the the Missionary store (can't remember the name) and ask for the undergarments.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsXzHLiHTOU Here is an Atheist going and getting some from "said" store, I don't agree with his tasteless manner with how he is doing it, but this shows it.
j.
Yes, murderers CAN be saved, but there is no guarantee to it. In our belief of the three different kingdoms of glory in Heaven. They will have the choice once they die, as will you, to accept what The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints believes.
Family. Isn't It About Time?
www.healthymarriage.org
So how does that work? Is it kinda like an ultimatem- either believe what we have to say or you won't get into heaven?
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
Since I was once an active member baptized in the Church of Jeses Christ of Latter Day Saints, I can tell you why people use the word Mormon as a deragatory term. Many people relate the Mormons to Polygamy because some members of the church who have separated to form the Fundamentalist Church. They believed that since certain members of the church practiced polygamy, then it was okay for everyone to practice.
As for the chocolate/caffeine thing, I never understood that either. Caffeine isn't strictly prohibited in the church. It is documented that the members are not supposed to drink coffee, tea, or strong drink (so, if you think that Mountain Dew falls into the category of strong drink, I guess I can see where that rumor comes from).
Never let the world get you further down, it already has the weight of gravity on your shoulders.
Hmm, I know nothing of Mormonism so, if what you say is true and (as of now) I have no reason to doubt, then you actually seem to have relatively reasonable religion.
I have only one bone to pick.
"It's pretty amazing how the Book of Mormon fits in with EVERYTHING that the Bible teaches!" Are you suggesting that Joseph Smith never read the bible?
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
No, i'm not. Thats basically how our religion started, as a matter of fact.
Actually, you should read the Joseph Smith story sometime. It's pretty nifty. But, in a nutshell, he was confused about all of the different religions and didn't know which church to join. Then one day, he was reading the Bible and came across James 1:5- "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, which giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him." He decided to do what the scripture said. He went into a grove of trees in the woods and started to pray, asking God which church to join. He suddenly was taken over by an unexplainable darkness, and it had such power over him as to bind his mouth and render him unable to speak. In his own words, "just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me. It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!"
*For a full version, go here: http://www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/controllers/potcController.j...
yeah...in a nutshell. =D
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
So, you admit Joseph Smith to be a fairly well read guy when it comes to the Bible. So, why is it so surprising that the book of morm corresponds to the bible?
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
It's not surprising. It's just cool. For instance, i'll be reading something in the Book of Mormon and think..wow. It says that exactly in the Bible, too! That was more for other people's benifit than my own. I know that they're both true, and that Joseph Smith read the Bible. But many people think that the Book of Mormon is a total contradiction to the Bible. I was just trying to point out that this is most definitly not true, and that actually everything that the Book of Mormon teaches corresponds with the Bible.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
Because Joseph Smith isn't the Author. It's so awesome, not surprising, because it was written Anciently, and the Gospel transfered that purely into a separate culture from the one in Jerusalem which wrote the Bible. So it's awesome as a powerful 2nd witness on the globe to those same truths transfered from God to us, and we have at least these two records of it's validity.
God's going to do everything to help us.
Hi Dave,
Well, if we look at the true historical facts here, Joseph Smith is the author of the Book of Mormon, just as Matthew is the author of the Book of Matthew, and Paul, the author much of the new testament. We can assume that all authors were divinely inspired, but can we prove it by scientific facts, the flat out answer is no.
But as students or literature and logic, we can safely come to likely assumptions.
What is true is that the Bible was written over the period of 1200 years, by over 50 or 60 authors who didn't know each other or were aware of each others writings. More so, much of the old testament was very prophetic for what would come of the future, the New Testament. This is purely great luck, something magical, or divinely inspired.
Much of what is said in the Bible can also be backed up by true science, civilizations, cities, kings, can be traced by archaeologist. Geologist have even assumed that at once there was a great flood that was so large, that Mount Artat in Turkey has ocean sea salt and sea shells deposited at it's highest peak.
But if we take a look at the Book of Mormon, we find that there are many things in which it claims, to contradict with modern archaeological science today.
Such as:
-The detailed history and civilization described in the Book of Mormon does not correspond to anything found by archaeologists anywhere in the Americas. The Book of Mormon describes a civilization lasting for a thousand years, covering both North and South America, which was familiar with horses, elephants, cattle, sheep, wheat, barley, steel, wheeled vehicles, shipbuilding, sails, coins, and other elements of Old World culture. But no trace of any of these supposedly very common things has ever been found in the Americas of that period. Nor does the Book of Mormon mention many of the features of the civilizations which really did exist at that time in the Americas. The LDS church has spent millions of dollars over many years trying to prove through archaeological research that the Book of Mormon is an accurate historical record, but they have failed to produce any convincing pre-columbian archeological evidence supporting the Book of Mormon story. In addition, whereas the Book of Mormon presents the picture of a relatively homogeneous people, with a single language and communication between distant parts of the Americas, the pre-columbian history of the Americas shows the opposite: widely disparate racial types (almost entirely east Asian - definitely not Semitic, as proven by recent DNA studies), and many unrelated native languages, none of which are even remotely related to Hebrew or Egyptian.
Also, The only persons who claimed to have actually seen the gold plates were eleven close friends of Smith (many of them related to each other). Their testimonies are printed in the front of every copy of the Book of Mormon. No disinterested third party was ever allowed to examine them. They were retrieved by the angel at some unrecorded point. Most of the witnesses later abandoned Smith and left his movement. Smith then called them "liars."
Although Joseph Smith said that God had pronounced the completed translation of the plates as published in 1830 "correct," many changes have been made in later editions. Besides thousands of corrections of poor grammar and awkward wording in the 1830 edition, other changes have been made to reflect subsequent changes in some of the fundamental doctrine of the church. For example, an early change in wording modified the 1830 edition's acceptance of the doctrine of the Trinity, thus allowing Smith to introduce his later doctrine of multiple gods. A more recent change (1981) replaced "white" with "pure," apparently to reflect the change in the church's stance on the "curse" of the black race.
So logic tells us, if the Book of Mormon were divinely inspired, why is it wrong with archaeological findings, more so, why has it been changed so often?
Just things to ponder.
But if we take a look at the Book of Mormon
The Bible that The Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints uses is the King James version. It contains footnotes at the bottom that correspond with the Book of Mormon, Topical Guide, and other books. It is a really cool refference point and very helpful in explaining things that happend.
Yes, a lot of the things are similar in the Book of Mormon as in the Bible, but there are a lot of differences as well. A lot of the Book of Mormon stories were occurring at the same time of the Bible stories time periods. So I can see where you are coming up with the similarities and wondering about possible playgerism, but they are two different books.
Family. Isn't It About Time?
www.healthymarriage.org
Interesting thread going here. Before I go on, I must state three facts which may influence anyone's opinion of what I might have to say:
1. I am a descendent of Joseph Smith's family from an earlier branch before his immediate family migrated from Central Vermont to Palmyra. My branch migrated to a rural area near Albany, NY.
2. I am not now nor ever have been a member of the LDS Church.
3. I am a very committed atheist.
That said, it is important to fully understand the history of "uncle Joe" prior to his "discovery" and "translation" of the gold plates he purportedly found in the woods near his families farm.
Historical records are clear on several important facts of this "pre-Mormon" period:
1. Prior to the visit of the Angel Moroni, Joseph and his father ran a business of sorts as "dowsers" finding water for local farmers using mystical stones (similar to the stones he claims allowed him to translate the gold plates).
2. Joseph and his father actually spent time in jail for fraud in their endeavors to mystically find water for gullibel locals
3. The area of what is now Rochester, NY was at the time, a hot bed of rather bizzare religious revelations and young Joseph's successful launch of a religion was not his first attempt to promote revelations. I have family documents of letters sent by the Palmyra branch to residual family "back east" clearly describing some of Joseph's bizzare earlier claims to religious revelations of a totally different type when he was as young as 11.
4. Joseph and hs father ran numerous con jobs in the area and were well known kooks and con artists at the time. One local newletter we have preserved reports in a rather humorous vein some of the rather unbelievable things the entire Smith family often told locals regarding their abilities and powers. One reference is particularly interesting because the dating of the story suggests it was when Joseph was perhaps about 5 years of age and his father was out drumming up business to help allow farmers to solicit rain from the skies during a particularly dry spring in upsatee NY, which would be limited only to the farmer's fields for whom Smith would perform his antics for -- thereby presumably soliciting money from multiple farmers for his services.
I won't bother to comment on the religious doctrine or evolution of practices of the LDS church or it's current adherents, but I can relate to the rather sordid background of the founder up to the time he did successfully create a religion and propel himself to a position he himself compared to the Pope of the Roman Church.
Members of LDS should avail themselves to read the entire story of Joseph Smith and not just the official LDS biographies, of which there are plenty, all of course providing flowing and glorious accounts of Joe's revelations and good deeds to offer the one true path to salvation. He was rather brilliant to tie his story into the virtually uncontested Christian religion of the time. If he had deviated too far, he would have attracted considerable wrath from potential converts. His other perhaps brillant move was to build upon the incredibly strong nationalism that was prevelent at the time in our new nation. A religion what suggested the cradle of civiliation was really in the New World was a very attractive concept to early Americans and undoubtedly helped bring in the faithful who would be open to a history that provided the ultimate importance to the America's as opposed to the "old world."
For a point by point response to these same old accusations, please see:
http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Search_for_the_Truth_DVD
thanks
That's all very interesting information. Most of that I knew, and some I did not. What other religious claims did he make exactly?
Like I said before, man is not perfect. Joseph Smith was not a perfect man, and he did do things that he should not have done, dishonest things, especially before the church was established. I am in no way denying that. However, I do not think that this has any relevence to our beliefs.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
First I want to start off with, you can choose to believe as you so desire, that is your right. But if you or your church (LDS) is going to make claims of being Christians or the true Christian Church or the "reformed or reestablished" Church. You should expect some resistance and for that matter some amount of correction of false claims toward Orthodox Christianity and False Claims of the Mormon Church. I am not, I repeat I am not against anyone personally, but I am told by scripture to test all things and hold fast to what is good and true (I Thess 5:21, II Tim 1:13) And that we are to hold to sound doctrine that was already preached by the Apostles and correct that which is out of line (I Tim 1:3; 10, II Tim 3:16)
James 1:5 in "context" is speaking of wisdom through trials, not asking God for wisdom if the other churches are true or not, but wisdom when going through trials. Here is the first chapter of James to remove any questions or doubt
1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
9 Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted:
10 But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away.
11 For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.
12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
Joseph Smith was told by "God" in which he record in the Pearl of Great Price 2:18-19 (a Mormon volume seen on the same level as the Bible, Book of Mormon and another work of the Mormon Church Doctrine and Covenants) that "all their creeds were an abomination his sight and all their members were corrupt" and again in 2:22 Joseph Smith stated that "all the sects-all united to persecute me" It is not the Christian Church that first attacked the Mormons, but Joseph Smith who first attacked Christendom. According to Joseph Smith and the Mormon Church, there has been no Christian Church since that death of the last Apostle (the Apostle John AD 95-120 as no date was given for his death) the Church stopped being the Church. Well this makes Jesus out to be a liar when he said to Peter in Matt 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This was also said to the Jew in the Old Testament and to us in the New Testament "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee" (Heb 13:5, Deut 31:6)
Also within that same account of Joseph Smith "seeing" God the Father and God the Son in his "vision" he states that God the father has a tangible body of flesh and blood, just as we do. Jesus answered that question for us quite well I have to say. In Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." and in John 4:24 "God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." So Jesus answers Joseph Smith and the Mormon Churches claim that God the Father has a physical body, but he does it in such a way that can't be denied.
One question I will ask of you, if you compare your "testamony" or your burning in your bussom to Ephesians 6:16 that the enemy shoots firey darts or arrows, and with what Galatians 1:6-9 That states if the Apostles themselves or even an Angel from heaven were to give the Galatians another Gospel than that which was already preached to them, that those that preached this other Gospel would be Accursed. This is the strongest word Paul could have used in the Greek language Accursed or the greek "anathema" which means "a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction" Paul also states in II Corinthians 11:4 "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." So we see there is another Jesus, another Gospel and another Spirit and that Satan himself wanders around as an Angel of Light (II Corinthians 11:14) And "Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." (II Corinthians 11:15) So even the ministers of these false wannbe "christian churches" look righteous enough to look as if they are righteous in the sight of the unbeliever. This is the Mormon Church and their Doctrines, this does not follow historic Christianity and must be dissmissed and resisted and called what it is, a non-christian cult.
What is a Christian? One who follows the Jesus of the Bible, not the Jesus of Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Islam or any other non-christian religion. Jesus said I am The Way, The Truth, The Life no man comes to the Father but through him, the real Jesus, God the Son, second person of the Trinity, not one of many gods. If we are wrong about who Jesus is, we are wrong enough to lose our very souls to hell fire. If the Mormon church is correct, we have nothing to worry about, someone can get our names and baptize for us after we dead, but if the Mormon Church is wrong, and you are a Mormon, you might want to rethink your position on Mormonism, is spending eternity separated from God in eternal punishment worth following some man named Joesph Smith or Brigham Young or the Mormon church for that matter?
If you wish to talk about any of this or more, I am very will to talk, you can email me at erase@shaw.ca
Jason
No, these are all very good points.
I interpret James I completely differently..and there can be different interpretations. I think that that is what the scripture means, that if you lack widsom, ask of God. However, you must ask in faith. I'm not quite sure that I understand what you're saying..where does it say that it's aquiring wisdom through trials?
Joseph Smith did say that God said that all the other churches were an "abomination in his sight" but it goes on to say "they draw near unto me with thier lips, but thier hearts are far from me". It's basically what I said before..that all the churches probably had some form of the truth, but this, the LDS church, was the only one on the earth that has the WHOLE truth.
In Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." , that was when he was ressurected, and later it says that he "has not yet decended to my father". That was the only reason that they could not touch him then. He obviously had a body of flesh and bone before this, when he was persecuted and crucified. As for the second scripture you used, i'll have to look that one up. But it could be saying that God has a spirit, just like us, and we must not only worship him physically, by going to church, but with our spirits, with our hearts.
The whole last part of your comment is completly opinion-based, and not factual based. Those scriptures DO speak of false doctrines and other churches and jesuses. However, I do not believe that this is my church. "Our Jesus" or the one in the Book of Mormon, is the SAME ONE as the one in the Bible. While the beliefs of Christians cannot be limited to a few doctrines, They all basically believe that Jesus is their Lord and Savior, just as I do. He died for me and suffered for my sins, so that I may be forgiven and have a chance to return back to him and the Father. We do not have two seperate Jesuses, there is one and only one. And if the Mormon church is wrong, as you obviously believe it is, then we will have nothing to worry about. We do nothing that would be considered "wrong" by other christians. We adhere to the basic beliefs of Christianity. There is no reason to believe that we would be in "eternal punishment" as you so eloquently put it. All in all, we are Christians, according to all of the definitions. If you would like to debate further, please feel free to message me. however, like I said before, I am more here to answer questions about my religion, and not defend it.
I would appreciate it if you were not so hostile next time. Rudeness doesn't solve anything. Thanks =D
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
James 1 Speaks of Trials, read it in context, you cannot take that one verse out and apply it for what Joseph Smith claims it was to find which church was true or not.
The Greek of God is Spirit is exactly that, God is Spirit, some where along the line some one added an "a" it doesn't affect the text, but it does make it clearer without the "a"
If I came across as rude I am sorry, not my intent, but if someone is posting on a public forum and stating this and that, you must be prepared to respond, you may choose not to respond, this is your right as it is my right to defend the True Christian Church from falsehood. Now I am sure you are sincere in your beliefs as anyone who has taken up any religion is sincere, sincerity makes not truth, as you can be sincere and sincerely wrong.
j.
That could be very possible, and I think i'll read it.
However, I don't think that it really matters that it was talking about something else. Joseph Smith interpreted it as asking God about ANYTHING, including which church to join. And because that's what he believed that scripture meant, he went and asked God, thus seeing the vision and starting our church.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
Erase,
As far as the context of James 1:5, you're just nitpicking. The point is that a young man read a verse and felt moved to pray to God for guidance when he felt he lacked wisdom. Where's your problem with that? I'd bet you do that or similar every day. That's why we read the scriptures--to get inspiration about how to conduct our lives and how to get closer to God. Not as a research project.
As far as Peter being the rock, I would think that Christ was way too smart to base His Church on a fallible man. Speaking of context, in that passage, Christ is blessing Peter for having received the revelation that He (Jesus) was indeed the Christ, the Son of the living God. Christ's church was to be founded on the principle of revelation from heaven; hence all the accounts in Acts of the apostles acting only after receiving direction from on high. The apostle Paul knew full well that the Church of his day would not last and clearly predicted its fall into apostacy in more than one of his epistles.
As far as God being spirit. Yes he is. And so are you and I. Yet all of us also have bodies that house those spirits. The same verse that you refer to exhorts that "they that worhip him must do so in spirit." I'm sure you don't think that means we are to put aside our flesh while we worship! It is abundantly clear from the New Testament that Jesus had a very real body after the resurrection--that he was more than a spirit. Are you suggesting that he died (separation of body and spirit) again after the resurrection? Or are you just stuck in the "traditional Christian" gnostic heresy that anything with matter/body/flesh is corrupt and evil and therefore God cannot have a body?
Finally, you claim to be defending "the True Christian Church." Would that be Catholicism, or some version of Protestantism. If the latter, which, and with what authority? Either you accept Peter as the "rock" and therefore the first pope and the Protestants are all excommunicate heretics, or the Catholic church was apostate and all the Protestant churches her illegitimate children. If the latter, then you must await the time of restitution of all things, spoken of by Peter, since you can't expect Jesus to return before that time (Acts 3:21). And on what basis do you refer to "the" true Christian church? There is no consensus, let alone unanimity, among "traditional" Christians as to doctrine, practice, etc., and the more one studies ancient Christianity the more it sounds like "Mormonism." (I refer you to these websites: http://farms.byu.edu/ and http://fairlds.org/ so you can inform yourself better, in case it is truth that you really seek.)
A little less uninformed certitude, please, before you attack others.
Hermano Pablo el Camba
Joseph Smith's story is much more complex and the official LDS version leave much of the really interesting stuff out. The facts are very different.
1. He and his father were well known con men who both got arrested for fraud when they went about the region of NY near Palmyra selling their services as dowsers looking for water.
2. He also was known to try to sell his services as a rain maker during a particularly dry growing season
3. Before he "found" the golden plates, he tried unsuccessfully to found at least one other new religion, but it was so far afield from christianity at the time, he was ridiculed to no end. I have letters documenting this from the period.
the bottom line is that Joseph Smith was very different than the prophet the LDS tries to portray him as and they go to great lengths to hide the real story from their followers. It is a shame such otherwise intelligent people today believe in such nonsense.
"Religion is bunk"...Thomas Edison
I have only one bone to pick.
"It's pretty amazing how the Book of Mormon fits in with EVERYTHING that the Bible teaches!" Are you suggesting that Joseph Smith never read the bible?
What's more amazing is how entire Chapters of Isaiah made it's way in to the Book of Mormon in perfect King James English (1611 AD) Yet the book of Mormon was said to be wriiten before the KJV was published. Words are italicized, vernacular particualr to that area and era (1611) was used in the Book of Mormon.
j.
Ah, Erase!
You're just bound to be argumentative, aren't you? ;)
Have you ever been a translator? When one is confronted with a text which, one knows, has already been translated into the target language, it would be considered a waste of time and effort to go about re-translating the entire text from scratch. That is, unless, you became aware of significant discrepancies between the extant translation and your source text. In that case you would use the existing translation as a guide, while correcting the discrepancies. So. Joseph recognied that Nephi was quoting Isaiah (esp since Nephi said he was going to), and realized that the existing KJV would suit the purpose, except for some discrepancies. Those discrepancies (if you take the time to actually READ from the Book of Mormon, instead of parroting what you've been taught or read somewhere else) just happen to coincide with very ancient versions of Isaiah that only came to light with the Dead Sea Scrolls in the mid-20th century. Could you please, then, explain how Joseph Smith could give us a version of Isaiah that matched a text that wouldn't be available until 100 years after his time, unless he really was working from an ancient text transcribed from the plates of brass, as Nephi claimed?
And, while all that's quite amazing, the real proof is in the reading. Read and pray; ask God instead of your pastor or the owner of the local "christian" bookstore (since they each have a rather obvious conflict of interest).
Hermano Pablo el Camba
It's erase, thanx, I will nitpick on that. :oP
Please read or re-read by about post, but I will state it again. The point being is how does the Book of Mormon contain Perfect King James English from 1611, when those passages from Isaiah were said to be included into the book of Mormon around 588-770 BC, I'm not sure of the exact date there, please forgive my tossing of a date there, but I think I am close. When the English language used in the King James Bible wasn't even developed until the 10-11 Century.
Here is a history mapping out the English language:
and the link, image is too big :o\
http://www.danshort.com/ie/grafx/timeline.gif
The problem is not the fact that entire chapters of Isaiah are copied into the Book of Mormon word for word, but word for word in King James English, even with the italicized words that the translaters put into the text to show the words they added that were not in the Hebrew, but with out them the passage wouldn't make any sense or as much sense.
j.
Did you even READ what I posted? Let me keep this simple. Joseph Smith is translating a document. The document's author says, "Now I'm going to quote Isaiah." Joseph says, "Oh, I have a 19th c. Bible here where Isaiah was already translated (in the 17th c.). I don't need to completely retranslate this part." That's how KJV English gets into the Book of Mormon. Got it?
Then Smith realizes there are certain differences between his author's (Mormon) text and the KJV that he has at hand in 1832. So his translation differs slightly from the KJV.
Fast forward 100 years. The Dead Sea Scrolls are discovered and--lo and behold--they contain ancient versions of Isaiah. What's more, the Isaiah versions from the Dead Sea scrolls --*that Jos. Smith obviously never even heard of*--contain THE SAME VARIATIONS from the KJV that Jos. Smith inserted in the Book of Mormon 100 years earlier.
Explain that.
Or are you trying to say that Isaiah didn't write before 600 BC? 'Cause he did. And those writings were in the plates that Lehi and his family carried with them from Jesusalem and it was from those plates that Nephi copied the Isaiah passages into his own record, and it was from that reocrd that Mormon copied into the plates that Jos. Smith translated.
Hermano Pablo el Camba
How did the "plates" (yes written in reformed Egyptian, which no one has heard of outside of the LDS) contain word for word King James English with the translators italized words which were added for meaning. The burden of proof here in on you, not me. And when I mean you, that is a general you, ala LDS Church.
j.
Reformed Egyptian? This argument is so old and useless that you antis really should let it go. Reformed means adjusted, changes, you understand. Nephi was simply stating that they didn't stick to the traditional changes. In fact, it sounds (if you have ever read the book you seem to know so much about) like Lehi himself put the "reform" in reformed Egyptian.
Of course no one has ever heard of reformed Egyptian. Nephi never claimed it was a widespread language, he was just clarifying that it wasn't traditional Egyptian.
For those with an open mind, who actually want an answer to this question and aren't just trying to bash someone else's faith or declare them a cult, please see:
http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms:Reformed_...
There was no English on any of the plates! (Though I think I'M writing in English!) They were in another language--most likely Hebrew, but a version closer in line with the Dead Sea version than with the Septuagint. The plates taken from Jerusalem would probably have been in Hebrew. The Isaiah text was transcribed from that set of plates by Nephi onto some other plates that he made. Then Mormon (nearly 1000 years later) found the transcription Nephi had made and copied it into his compilation. Just figure Joseph copied most of his translation of what he saw on Mormon's plates from the KJV he was familiar with. But you still refuse to address how Joseph was able to insert changes in the KJV that would only be verified by the discovery of of the Dead Sea Isaiah over 100 years after JS. But I'm sure anyone reading this has noticed you dodging the answer and the question. Typical of attackers.
Hermano Pablo el Camba
The Septuagint was written in Greek not Hebrew, I'm sure you meant that...
And Yes I I realize that there was no English written on the Plates, my point is why would Joseph Smith lift, copy, steal, call it what you will, word for word from the KJV, even the Italics, it just doesn't make sense to me.
If no other known major Hebrew (Jew) figure has been known to write in Egyptian in Antiquity, and throughout the Old Testament the Hebrew people were told to have nothing to do with Egypt, etc, why would God want a record kept in Egyptian, when Hebrew was a far superiour language to begin with.
Even Joesph of the Bible (not Smith) who became 2nd in command behind Pharoh learnt the language, may have even written it, but there is no proof of any records in Egyptian details his story.
Ockham's Razor states "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one," or alternately, "we should not assert that for which we do not have some proof."
As I have no proof any Hebrews didn't write in Egyptian, you don't have any proof any Hebrews did write in Egyptian, but looking at the external evidence of what is known about the Hebrews it is safe to assume that the Hebrews would have never taken historical records down in anything but the Hebrew language, and before for say well the "Septuagint" that was a translation of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) into Greek. So nothing was recorded. Yes there are those of that area that used Greek as it was the Common language of the day, but you will not find any of those writings in the OT Cano.
j.
If we want to talk about Joseph Smith as a translator, how about his translation of the Book of Abraham, no Egyptologist says his translation is even close to what was translated. Which brings the Book of Mormon into question, in my opinion of course.
j.
Well. here are some questions:
Who is Joseph Smith? (to be totally honest, every time i think of the South Park episode talking about the history of the church of latter day saints, I get the wrong idea of Mormons)
What if the person you marry isn't exactly who you think he is? What if he's abusive?
""faith without works is dead""
how do people earn getting into heaven? I thought the whole point was that humans will never, ever be good enough to get there, and it's only by God's grace that we do.
This is just teasing--so are you saying that some people get into "crap" heaven? Lol, because that's where I'll probably be.
Who is the prophet Mormon now? And who's to say that he won't/doesn't abuse his power?
Thanks!
lol yeah..i def. know what you mean. But hopefully you know that you can't judge people based on South Park lol!!
Mkay. Joseph Smith is the founder of our church, the one who God spoke to start our religion. If you read my last comment, It pretty much says everything. But i'll give you this link also: http://www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/controllers/potcController.j...
^^ It's much better in his words. I get chills every time I read it!
If the person that you marry for eternity is not the person you think he is, then you can divorce him in the same way that you could a civil mairrage. I'm not quite sure how all of that works, theres probably a little more to it. However, this hardly ever happens because most people in my church pray about the person they are going to marry, and I truly believe that God answers prayers, and therefore would not let me marry someone like that. Also, in order to be officially be married in the temple, you have to be worthy. Someone who is abusive is most DEFINITLY not worthy!
With God's grace, it is sort of the same idea. We believe that it is through the atonement of Jesus Christ that we are able to get to heaven. Christ suffered for our sins so that we would be able to repent. But the point is, you have to repent. You also have to work on it, and try to do what's right. Man will obviously make mistakes. That's what repentance is for.
and lol to the "crap heaven." I laughed for an hour.
Our modern prophet is Gordon B. Hinkley. His last name is really fun to say, btw. =D
He won't abuse his power simply because God will not allow someone who would abuse the power to be our prophet, in the same way that he would not allow someone who is incompotent or who can't do it be our prophet. I think it's nifty how we've had so many prophets, and not one has ever been rendered incapable of doing things that the prophets must do. Sure they've had health problems before, but not to the point to where they couldn't do thier job.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
Sorry, I can't help myself with either of these. 1 is going to be stupid. 2 is going to be irrelevant.
1) Is your modern prophet related to John Hinkley?
2)"The statement below is true.
The statement above is false." Both are false. The top one cannot be true because, if it is, then it is false. The bottom one cannot be true, because, if it is, then it isn't.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
1. I have absolutely NO idea if he is. I sure hope not! ha.
2. Hmm. I suppose so. You could go back and forth for a while. It's a thinker though, huh? I change my signiture like..every other day. I can't stand for stuff to stay the same.
I know, i'm cool.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
It is a good one. I enjoy that sort of thing. The problem, of course is that, if the first one is false, then then the bottom one is false, meaning that the top one is true....MY BRAIN.
Oh, and, don't blame Canada. It isn't their fault. They can't help it.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
Yeah. It's kind of like... the universe. Like..never ending. What's there when it stops? But it doesn't stop. It continues on forever. And time. It will never stop. Even if the universe is destroyed and all life as we know it ends, it will still go on. AHHHH it's hard to fathom. It's too early for this.
And I know. I can't help it. You have to blame someone.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
Oh, and, don't blame Canada. It isn't their fault. They can't help it.
Ahh you can blame us, we have thick skin hahaha
j.
I'm quite sure they aren't related. I can find no reference of any kind anywhere on the Internet that mentions the two of them in the same article.
"Hinckley" is a fairly common name.
Actually some prophets in the past (S.W. Kimball, E.T. Benson, H.W. Hunter) have been so weak that most of their duties were taken over by other members of the 1st Presidency. But that's the beauty of the system, isn't it? Since all the apostles hold the necessary keys, there's never any gap in the leadership.
Thanks for the thread!
Hermano Pablo el Camba
Hi daNIsha,
Since my wife's ex WAS abusive, I can give you some insight.
Even though marriage in the temple is intended to be "for time and for all eternity," couples can divorce, and don't need permission. They are then free to remarry "for time only" outside the temple. If one or the other wants to remarry in the temple, that person needs to request a "cancellation of sealing" which is granted only by the President/Prophet of the Church, since only one man on earth at a time has full authority over temple sealings. The person only needs to submit a letter, along with letters from local Church leaders. Once the prior sealing is cancelled, the person can marry again, in the temple, and be sealed forever to the new spouse.
So, what if there is abuse, but no divorce? That is one of those situations where we leave everything up to the judgement and grace of God. No one will be required to spend eternity with an abuser--the abuser wouldn't be worthy of his/her spouse anyway. It's kind of like an automatic cancellation of sealing: like a breach of contract. If the victim did everything possible in this life to comply with God's laws, she/he would not be deprived of any blessing in the next life just because someone else was abusive (that's what grace is about-God makes up for what we can't help). The victim would be able to have a "celestial" marriage with someone else who WAS worthy of her/him. And that would be true for any situation that made one spouse unworthy of the other (unrepented adultery, child abuse, etc.).
As far as the roles of faith and works, we really are not much different from other Christians on this. The best explanation outside the New Testament epistles is from the Book of Mormon, "For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do." (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/25/23#23) Some interpret that to mean that grace 'kicks in' after we've done all we can, others read it as "despite all our efforts to 'be good,' it's still ultimately grace that makes salvation possible." I think both are right.
The process is, I think, nowhere more beautifully described than in the last book of the Book of Mormon, by the last prophet to write in the record, as his final exhortation. "Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God. And again, if ye by the grace of God are perfect in Christ, and deny not his power, then are ye sanctified in Christ by the grace of God, through the shedding of the blood of Christ, which is in the covenant of the Father unto the remission of your sins, that ye become holy, without spot." (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/moro/10/32-33#32)
Hope that helps.
Hermano Pablo el Camba
Excuse me but if or if not the book of mormon agrees with the Bible, it is not the Bible.
The Bible is the only word of God.
Mkay. well...we don't believe that. To us, they are both true.
The statement below is true.
The statement above is false.
The Bible is the only revelation of Jesus Christ, you cannot be a Christian apart from Christ.
I don't mean to offend you as a person, but mormonism is a cult.
And if you don't believe the Bible to be the only word of God than you are contradicting the Bible.
If the Bible were the only word of God, one might think it would say so. Only two scriptures even resemble such a declaration: one in Deuteronomy (4:2) and one in Revelation (22:18). Since Deuteronomy is in the old testament, doesn't that mean the new testament shouldn't have been written? And as for the one in Revelation, Revelation was not the last book written in the Bible, it only appears last.
On the other hand, the Bible shows a clear pattern of God revealing his word to his LIVING prophets. "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret to his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7)
Those two verses in Deuteronomy and Revelation are clearly warnings to people who might modify the original words that were in the bible (an indication that God knew that people WOULD change things in the Bible, which strengthens the need for modern revelation and prophets). Since God is God, HE can add to any book or any scripture he wants to.
Barna research organization (a christian research group) found that Mormons read the bible more than any other church in the United States except for the Penecostal/Foursquare church. (http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=93) Maybe Mormons understand the Bible better than you might think.
PS. - Great Blog! Well written and a straight forward but unoffensive way of representing your faith.
Okay first of all in dueteronomy 4:2 it says "Now listen, Isreal, listen carefully to the rules and regulations that I am teaching you to follow so that you may live and enter and take possession of the land that God, the God of your fathers, is giving to you.
Don't add a word to what I command you, and don't remove a word from it. Keep the commands of God, your God, that I am commanding you."
He is not speaking of the Bible, but the rules and commands that he was giving them in regards to the land God gave them.
Also Revelation was the last Book written.
Revelation 22:18-19 "I give fair warning to all who hear the words of this prophecy of this book: if you add to the words of this prophecy, God will add to your life the the disasters written in this book; if you subtract from the words of this prophecy; God will subtract your part from the Tree of Life and the Holy City that are written in this book."
In Amos 3:3 -7 it says " Do two people walk hand in hand if they aren't going to the same place?
Does a lion roar in the forest if there's no carcass to devour?
Does a young lion growl with pleasure if he hasn't caught his supper?
Does a bird fall to the ground if it hasn't been hit with a stone?
Does a trap spring shut if nothing trips it?
when the alarm goes off in the city, aren't people alarmed?
and when disaster strikes the city, doesn't God stand behind it?
The fact is God, the master, does nothing without first telling his prophets the whole story."
He was speaking of the prophets of the Bible, the prophets who allready covered everything and through revelation tells us what is coming.
You sound like a very versed Mormon I ask you to take a look at this link.
http://www.mrm.org/topics/evangelism-issues/ten-lies-i-told-mormon-missi...
According to you and your sect, you are correct. According to every other sect of Christianity, you are wrong about something, at least. How can you be so sure that the mormons aren't right? How do you know that Joseph Smith wasn't following the word of god?
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
I'm not quite sure I understand what you are saying about being correct when it comes to my sect, what sect exactly is it that you think I'm apart of?
If anything that a Christian says goes against what the Bible says, it