BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
diamond said:
I think Republicans are done with this as a whole, w/the exception of national security issues.
dbs
What evidence of this "change" do you have?
diamond said:
I think Republicans are done with this as a whole, w/the exception of national security issues.
dbs
diamond said:Thank you for your kind words.
I don't have a testimony of the Bible truths based on it's historicity-if a person needs that, I think that's sad-but won't belittle his Faith as some have attempted to do to mine.
You didn't win any arguments here because I never fully engaged in any, nor will I, my Faith isn't based on needing physical proof or historicity, as you seem to need for yours.
Until God The Father or Christ comes down and appears to you personally and commisions you or one of the leaders of your Faith and tells you and your leaders of your Faith :
to label the LDS Church as "cultists", I would encourage you and others not to do so.
Again I refer you to:
"But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned," (Matt. 12:36).
God Bless,
dbs
coemgen said:
I don't need the proof of historicity for my faith, but it's comforting it's there. And it's odd that it's close to 2,000 years older than Mormonism, and it has a growing amount of historical support, while The Book of Mormon isn't even recognized by the Smithsonian as a historical document because there's no support for it. I would feel uncomfortable putting my faith in something that has no historical foundation and is based on scribbled notes by someone with an eighth-grade reading level that's considered divine revelation. Also, the Bible even tells us to "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." (1 Peter 3:15) We're called to share and defend our faith. There's nothing wrong with what I'm doing here.
As far as Matthew 12:36, you're using it out of context to fit your own beliefs (something common to Mormonism).
First off, you're using a quote from Christ in reference to something immediate, not a new faith started about 1,800 years later.
Secondly, he's talking about how the Pharisees were attributing his authenticating miracles done in the power of the Holy Spirit to Satan. If you read the verse with the verses around it, or in context, you'll discover this. This is the best way to read the Bible. It's dangerous to just pick and choose random vereses to fit your personal views. Christ even says a few verses earlier "Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven . . ." So even if Mormonism were true, the verse can't say what you're trying to make it say. I'm just speaking against Mormonism (which wasn't even around at the time of this passage), not Christ and certainly not the Holy Spirit. So I can't be condemned. Sorry, dbs. I know you're crushed.
Until God The Father or Christ comes down and appears to you personally and commisions you or one of the leaders of your Faith and tells you and your leaders of your Faith :
Could you write the Book of Mormon under the same conditions that Joseph Smith wrote it?
BonoVoxSupastar said:
This is why I wonder if Pat's endorsement has some of that 'Mormon's aren't real Christians' mentality...
coemgen said:34. You must plagerize a good deal of the Old Testament
35. You must murder two men.
36. You must posses two guns while in jail on charges of treason
37. You must die in a gun battle
38. You must have more in common with David Koresh than you do Christ.
39. You must claim God calls you to become a polygamist
40. You must make false prophecies claiming Missouri is the location of Zion and a refuge for the saints with a new temple, only to be driven out of the state.
41. You must falsely prophecise that Christ is coming in 1843 and then 1891.
42. You must fail to make a long list of prophecies found here http://www.exmormon.org/prophet.htm despite the fact the Bible says "You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously . . . " Deut 18:21-22
I could go on, but I'll stop there for now.
Actually, I have completed the Bible recently.
First of all please learn to spell prophesyprophecise
diamond said:First of all please learn to spell
plagerize
Joesph
heros
Joesph
The Bible doesn’t plagiarize itself. The New Testament references the Old Testament, but it doesn’t steal words and phrases and claim it’s a “new revelation from God.” Smith not only stole about 30,000 words/phrases from the OT and called it his own, he created names of cities and people by taking cities and people from the OT, and switching the letters. I’ve posted this many times here and it’s widely available on the Internet. Does that sound like a prophet?diamond said:
I touched on some of these items before (the Bible plagiarizes itself does that make the Bible false?)
Joseph didn't plagerize the Bible-(he noticed that the prophecies were similar and inserted Isaiah's words as suitable.)
You just laid out a great argument against Joseph Smith -- why would a true prophet prophesize about something he’s not supposed to know? That sounds pretty silly.diamond said:
Also, if you understood the Bible, some prophecies are conditional: you have taken some quotes out of context and the Church never believed that the 2nd coming would happen in 1843 or 1891, the scriptures indicate that "no man knows the day of the coming of the Lord, but the Father"-that's what our Church teaches.
It was stopped because it was deemed illegal. Then church leaders changed their views. Utah also wanted to gain statehood.diamond said:
Polygamy was practiced for 50 years early in the Church history by less than 2% of a few selected faithful members because Joesph was instructed to by an Angel of God to do this; the Church has since quit the practice over 100 plus years ago, as it had served it's purpose.
They may have had different outcomes, but the similarities are there still.diamond said:
Attempting to link Joesph Smith to David Koresh shows not only your ignorance but the is height of absurdity -when comparing the 2 men's legacies.
This holds no value. Obviously, people were drawn to him. People were drawn to David Koresh, too.diamond said:
Here is what the Mayor of Boston, Josiah Quincy a non Mormon said when meeting Joseph Smith in the 1840s:
It is by no means improbable that some future textbook, for the use of generations yet unborn, will contain a question something like this: What historical American of the nineteenth century has exerted the most powerful influence upon the destinies of his countrymen? And it is by no means impossible that the answer to that interrogatory may be thus written: Joseph Smith, the Mormon prophet.
The size of the Mormon church doesn’t prove my arguments are wrong. That’s faulty logic. Also, it’s not continuing to flourish:diamond said:
You are coemgen the unwitting fulfillement of prophecy uttered by the Angel Moroni, this is what he told Joseph before giving him instructions of translating the Book of Mormon:
33 He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people
You post links to the same tried and tired aruguments that never have had any real traction; the Mormon Church is the 4th largest Christian denomination in the USA, it continues to flourish, continues to spread Christinaity through out the world regardless of how you think Christianity should be understood.
Well, except your church draws people in and then doesn’t allow people to question it. It also puts strong guilt on those who leave and changes what it believes. These are all signs of a cult.diamond said:
If the arguments you posted had validity -the LDS Church would have disintegrated a long time ago.
Yes, that explains why the Book of Mormon has been changed so much over the years. If the Book of Mormon is true, then why has the Mormon church changed it? Examples are: 1 Nephi 11:21; 19:20; 20:1 and Alma 29:4. Compare these with the original Book of Mormon. (Gerald and Sandra Tanner – the great-great-granddaughter of Brigham Young -- have counted 3,913 changes in the book of Mormon, excluding punctuation changes.)diamond said:
If the Book of Mormon was a a concoction of Joseph Smith based on his "scribbles" as you alleged earlier- the Church would have disbanded.
If I see a counterfeit posing as the truth, I’m going to call it out – especially when it claims to be “Christian.” And, once again, you’re judging me. Do you really have the authority to condemn me, or is it just out of frustration that you’re resulting to that?diamond said:
So continue to kick "against the pricks" and "fight the Saints of God" as Paul speaks of in the New Testament and I will hold a prayer in my heart that you and others that choose to do this will find something more productive to do in your "Christian" efforts.
Please stop casting aspersions about the beliefs of my Church.
You and those of your ilk will have to answer for your idle words.
coemgen said:
diamond said:coemgen -
The arguments you've posted I've heard before; they're nothing new or ground breaking.
The Church has a membership of 13 million, with a quater of a million joining in 2006.
The Mormon Church continues to grow and rings true to hundreds of thousands of people who join it annually.
It doesn't keep people from leaving who decide to leave; I left for 25 years and was never made to feel gulity about it- and came back when I was comfortable.
I told you I wasn't here to debate the tenets of my Faith.
Your pre occupation with trying to tear down the LDS Church isn't a healthy one.
best,
dbs
Romney's Challenge: Reader Emails Reveal Reservations About Mormonism
Monday , November 12, 2007
By Martin Frost
One of my recent columns discussed the role of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's Mormon faith in his campaign. My column pointed out that some people could not vote for Romney because of his religion and I asked readers who felt this way to explain their position.
I received more than 400 emails in response to this column and have now read all of them. Let me start by saying that a majority of the people responding to my column took the position that a candidate’s religion should not be a factor in whether or not he is elected. I personally agree with that view. I think it's un-American to judge a candidate on the basis of his or her religion. But it's nonetheless clear from reading these emails that Romney’s religion will be an issue if he wins the Republican nomination.
Reproduced below is a representative sample of the emails from readers who said that Romney's religion would prevent them from supporting him.
Charles M. Larson: "Their (Mormons) belief system and scriptural writings still proclaim and teach that God approves of racism by 'cursing' with dark skin and 'blessing' with light skin. And to people like myself, this is reason enough to not lend credibility to such an organization by offering one of its members the office of president of the United States."
Rick Olson: "the position of president is unique and requires the highest standards. The facts show that there is no historical basis for the Mormon religion and that it begins with the highly suspect Joseph Smith. The facts that contradict the tenets of the Mormon religion are widely available and someone who chooses to ignore them does so willingly. So the question that I must ask is: do I trust someone to be president of the United States who intentionally believes a lie and can I trust someone who does that to make the right decision when the heat is on?"
Warren Brown: "I believe that the Mormon Church has an agenda, to take over the powers, etc. of the country. To be governed by a Mormon president would be too close to being governed by the Mormon Church for my taste."
Mike Butz: "I have voted for the Republican candidate in every presidential election to date (I’m currently 41 years of age), but will not vote for Romney if he is the nominee. Mormons embrace the blasphemous notion that each of them (if deemed worthy enough) can, one day, become god of his own planet…As an evangelical Christian, I would have no trouble voting for a Catholic or a Jewish candidate, and would even consider voting for an atheist, but can and will never vote for someone whose ambitions include becoming god."
Edward Yezekian: "I think the question at hand is judgment. I wouldn’t vote for Mitt for the same reason I wouldn't vote for a Wican or an Atheist. Even a cursory evaluation of Mormonism, its history, its doctrines, and its contradictions would call into question any follower’s intelligence and/or judgment."
Bob Bilyeu: "The Mormon faith is a hierarchal organization. There are leaders who expect to be obeyed, and church law that is considered to supersede civil law. Would you feel comfortable electing a person to civil office if you believed that they would then answer to this alternative power structure, rather than to civil law?”
Diane Graber: "Mormons who are temple-worth wear special 'garments of the Holy Priesthood' (long johns) which they believe have special powers to protect them from danger and evil…If that's not enough, they believe the Garden of Eden was in Missouri, that Christ will return to Earth in a year that has had no rainbows and disbelieve all relevant scientific evidence as to the age of the Earth…Any man who could believe all this and not challenge it intellectually is not someone I would ever support to run this nation."
Mark Smith: "Why not Romney? You are also forgetting that voters have the right to choose or reject a candidate for any reason(s) they choose. Voter rejection of Romney because of his Mormonism is no more baffling than voter acceptance of Hillary who is unqualified and chosen by many simply because she is a woman and/or spouse of a former president."
Amy King: "You’d better believe that I refuse to vote for a man without the personal character to withdraw from a racist, sexist organization, and I'm very nervous about turning over the most powerful office in the world to a man who thinks he's going to become a god and collect trophy wives in the Celestial Kingdom."
Lori Daniel: "Even though he may have a great record as a governor, being a Mormon requires that he obey the teachings of the church and not those of the country…Romney may be a good person, but as a president, he will not be able to make decisions that might go against his religion. He views his religion as his salvation and to go against any principle of that religion would mean losing his salvation."
Frank Morley: "I do not believe that people who oppose Romney are religiously intolerant. I believe that they see what is a plain fact: Mormonism is intolerant. Pamphlets available to anyone who attends a Mormon Church tell of Joseph Smith’s 'enlightenment' and tell how he founded the only true church, that all Christian churches, and by definition, all other religions, are apostate. It is difficult to support a man who subscribes to such a position towards my church."
Jessica Elliott: "I can’t speak for all Christians or all Republicans, but I can give you an honest perspective from one average Christian mom who would never vote for a Mormon. You understand already that many people call Mormonism a cult. What you may not understand is that many of us see Mormonism as such a strange, ridiculous belief system that we have to seriously doubt the judgment of anyone who could believe it. It's like asking us to consider voting for someone who believes they were kidnapped by aliens."
John Commuta: "Bible believing Christians feel their loyalty is to Jesus. Mormons believe in a completely different Jesus than the Bible reveals. They consider him to be Lucifer’s brother, and not truly God, among many other foundational differences. So many devout Christians — who have as much right to vote according to their conscience as anyone — cannot vote for someone for the temporary job of president of the United States who has an antithetical view of their permanent Lord, to whom these Christians feel a higher allegiance and responsibility."
I thank everyone who responded to my column. The views reproduced above represent a minority of the total comments but a very loud and distinct minority.
deep said:I would vote for a Mormen, (Harry Reid) a Scientologist, etc..
I really don't care what group a person associates with.
but, it appears many people do care
coemgen said:This is popular on Digg right now:
Mitt Romney Buys Election in Florida Straw Poll
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdCcGWX2SuU