‘Betraying Jesus’: Pastor Tells Rev. Graham to ‘Repent’ for Saying It’s OK to Vote for a Mormon
- Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:25pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
The Rev. Franklin Graham has no problem with evangelical Christians voting for a Mormon presidential candidate. In fact, the faith leader appeared on CBN News, where he openly shared his opinions on the matter. But now, following his favorable comments about Mitt Romney’s faith, Graham (the son of evangelist Billy) is being called to repent by a fellow evangelical pastor.
Rev. Franklin Graham (AP Photo)
“Yes. The fact that Mitt Romney‘s a Mormon doesn’t bother me,” Graham told CBN when asked if it’s appropriate for an evangelical Christian to vote for a Mormon. “I think when we’re voting for president we need to get the person who is absolutely the most qualified. You can have the nicest guy and he can be a Christian and just wonderful but have absolutely no clue as to how to run a country.”
Watch Graham makes these statements, among others:
Following these comments, Pastor Steven Andrew of USA Christian Ministries is calling for Graham to retract his statement and to repent for saying that Christians can vote for Mormon candidates.
“Graham is misleading Christians to vote against Scripture for Mormon Mitt Romney,” Andrew says. “God cannot bless us for betraying Jesus and voting for a non-Christian. No one comes to God except through Jesus — this includes the USA.”
Screen shot from Andrew's "Christian Voting Guide"
To combat the claims that it’s permissible for an evangelical Christian to vote for a Mormon, Andrew has launched the “Christian Voting Guide,” which tackles a variety of issues surrounding faith and politics. In it, the pastor clumps “Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists and others” together as non-Christians who believers should avoid voting for:
Voting for non-Christians (Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists and others), or people who just say they are Christians but don’t rule in the fear God, results in God’s Judgment. The Holy Bible warns:
“Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the LORD? Therefore the wrath of the LORD is upon you.” 2 Chronicles 19:2
To have God’s blessings, will you follow this Biblical Christian voting guide and vote for leaders who rule in the fear of God?
Andrew goes on to say that Graham is guilty of overlooking scriptural commands. Additionally, he says, “There are reasons why Christians say Mormonism is a cult: no cross and heresy.“ He goes on to lament the purportedly secretive nature of Mormonism as well as notion that the faith system ”adds to the Bible.”
If a president is “missing a true relationship with God,” he worries that God won’t bless America.
The pastor, who is likely to garner both support and criticism for his comments, is also allegedly calling upon mega-pastor Joel Osteen, among others, to repent. In an October interview with the Washington Times, Osteen said:
“I believe that [Mormons] are Christians. I don’t know if it’s the purest form of Christianity, like I grew up with. But you know what, I know Mormons. I hear Mitt Romney — and I’ve never met him — but I hear him say, ‘I believe Jesus is the son of God,’ ‘I believe he’s my savior,’ and that’s one of the core issues.
I’m sure there are other issues that we don’t agree on. But you know, I can say that the Baptists and the Methodists and the Catholics don’t all agree on everything. So that would be my take on it.”
Watch these comments, below:
Andrew plans to try and change Graham’s mind as well as the opinion of other pastors who hold similar views.
(H/T: Urban Christian News)
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 694 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 662 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 364 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 342 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 231 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 238 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 231 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (1049)
John Coctostan
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:57pmI agree with Graham. I don’t completely agree with Olsten. Being a Christian is a matter of the heart. So, whatever the denomination, someone could belong to that group yet still not be a Christian. I think that’s that he meant. But he did say “I believe they ( Mormans) are Christians”. So, if its a matter of the heart, how does he know they are? Does he know their hearts?…all of them?
Report Post »Steve0218
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:11pmIt is not merely a matter of the heart. It is a matter of trusting in totally and only in the atonement of the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross that makes us acceptable to God. Believeing that Jesus died the death in our place that we should have died and He paid the price for our sins. Trust completely and totally in this it absolutely cannot be a Jesus + salvation.
Report Post »John Coctostan
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:26pmSo STEVEO..“It is a matter of trusting in totally and only in the atonement of the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross that makes us acceptable to God”..WITH-YOUR-HEART. Com’on neh.
Report Post »therookieblogger
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:56pmHere please read this…it might help… http://lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1?lang=eng
Report Post »LymanHunt
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:06pmJust to clear up a few things. The book of Revelations was not the last book written in the Bible. The belief that the Bible cannot be added to is falsely based upon Revelations 22:19. The scripture references the book of Revelations, not the entire Bible. The Bible was compiled long after Jesus suffered and died for our sins. To say it is forbidden to add to the Bible is an ignorant statement and does not represent historical nor biblical facts.
Report Post »To say that Mormons believe you must work your way to heaven is also false. Mormons believe that if you truly accept Christ as your Lord and Savior that this will be demonstrated through your faith by your works. This is a supported Biblical belief. Check James 2:17-20.
This Pastor comes across to me as either ignorant or purposefully misleading, I can’t say which. What I can say is that he is most definitely bigoted.
WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:31pmI have read the Book of Mormon. It has nothing to do with the gospel or Christianity. The Book of Mormon is a faux history of the Americas. It claims to be another testament of Jesus Christ, but it’s simply a history…and a false one at that. Believing in a faux history is not the same as believing in the gospel.
I think Glenn Beck is into Mormonism because it happens to underscore, even flatter, his ideas that the US was formed under this *divine providence* malarkey which Beck is always talking about. And since Mormonism claims that the early peoples of the Americas are descendants of Israel, that the land of the Americas are a new “promised land”, this explains why Glenn gets all giddy about Mormonism. Indeed, behind all of Glenn’s idolization of the founding fathers…especially George Washington, is the driving force for his apotheosis of favorite American figures…namely, a divine manifest destiny of this nation.
Mormonism just happens to be the best and niftiest of faux religions to underscore and fulfill one’s idolatry of nation.
Report Post »Roberta J
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:32pmHowever, to be a Christian means “Followers of Christ.” I don’t think you can be a follower of Christ and not agree with what He preached. Mormons do not believe what Christ preached.
OneofMany
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:49pm@LymanHunt – wrong. ALL the books in the bible were WRITTEN before the Book of Revelation was written. Not only that, the books takes us to the end of the world and it’s re-birth….
Joseph Smith was a scammer who put together parts of Masonic Traditions, with Christian beliefs and tossed in a few others…Which explains why ENTIRE books of the bible are COPIED. He was a treasure seeker and the very man (a linguist Ph.D. ) he claims deciphered his writings which he claims he got from the angel moroni… this very same linguist put out denial of Joseph Smith’s claims and further stated that the “writings” Joseph Smith brought to him was nothing but Chicken Scratch with some Egyptian hieroglyphics added for effect.
Do your research. One time when arguing with a mormon I said there is ZERO evidence of any Million Man Battle that the book of mormon claims happened in a pricise location in Missouri… ZERO archeological evidence… I even spoke with BYU’s top archeologist and he admitted to me they have ZERO evidence of such a battle. The religion is a joke.
I went to college in Utah and had numerous debates with return Missionary’s and it all boils down to “I believe because I feel the burning in my bosom”.. pure faith with ZERO factual basis.
I agree that we as Christians do have to make a leap of faith, but not without reason and solid evidences… I would call a well researched Christian faith more of a step of faith and Mormonism a giant Grand Canyon L
Report Post »OneofMany
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:52pmFor the matter at hand.. I agree with Pastor Graham… If we only voted for Authentic Christians, we may not ever vote… and just because a man isn‘t a Christian doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be a good leader. Also, just because a man is Christian or claims Christ as his Savior, doesn’t mean he knows how to lead at all.
If I have to choose between to competent leaders, I would certainly choose the Authentic Christian man because He has access to wisdom from God Almighty.
With regard to Mormonism… They believe Jesus is the brother of Lucifer (Satan)… not MY Jesus!
Report Post »P8riot
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:24pmI’m a “Mormon” and I’d vote for an evangelical.
Report Post »My Faith
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:33pmI will not vote for a Mormon as they are racist.Mormons wouldn’t allow blacks for a long time to be part of the church.
I will not vote for a catholic as they molest kids and are crooked as hell.
Darren
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:36pmWSGAC;
“I have read the Book of Mormon. It has nothing to do with the gospel or Christianity.”
Since I take your word that you’ve read it, I have to say that you then grossly misunderstand it. It has nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ? Click on the link below and follow whatever subsequent link and please show me how the Book of Mormon has nothing to do with the gospel of Jesus Christ.
http://lds.org/scriptures/tg/jesus-christ?lang=eng&letter=j
“Indeed, behind all of Glenn’s idolization of the founding fathers…especially George Washington, is the driving force for his apotheosis of favorite American figures…namely, a divine manifest destiny of this nation.
Mormonism just happens to be the best and niftiest of faux religions to underscore and fulfill one’s idolatry of nation.”
Huh? As a choice land we are to be good people if we expect to remain a choice land. That’s exactly what Mormonism teaches. The united states of America was Gods political blessing to the world. Lie all things given from God, we are to use it humbly lest God shall remove it from among us. This is the antithesis of idolarty.
If you think that calling this land a choice land established by divine providence than could you show me a more choice land inthe world. Or even in the history of the world?
Report Post »symphonic
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:41pm@ROBERTA “Mormons do not believe what Christ preached.”
You guys are so deceived. The Sermon on the Mount IS what Christ preached, at least the major speech, but the Mormons are so very aligned with those teachings. He is teaching all those WORKS that you must do, all of those things that matter, like praying in your closets and not on your football fields, like loving your enemies and not persecuting them and not voting for them because they are a mormon, like trying to be perfect like your Father which is in heaven is perfect, like not making excuses for a really bad personality and your personal sins and saying such things as “well Jesus suffered for me, so I don‘t need to worry about it or do anything about it because it won’t be held against me because I believe Jesus” well, yes, if you don‘t do what Jesus taught you can not expect to be in heaven with Him if you don’t repent and forsake sins. Jesus also taught many other things in the Sermon on the Mount and they are very instructive. Read Matt 5-7 and get a refresher, and know that THIS mormon believes all of that, every part, and does not excuse it away as “too hard.” Jesus taught it.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:42pmOne of many;
“@LymanHunt – wrong. ALL the books in the bible were WRITTEN before the Book of Revelation was written”
There are scholars, I think most ofthem, who disagree.
“I even spoke with BYU’s top archeologist and he admitted to me they have ZERO evidence of such a battle.”
What about Kimng David’s conquest of Jerusalem and following rule over a geographical area roughyl the same size as modern-day Isreal. Where’s the archeology behind that?
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:43pmP8triot;
Heh. Sometimes pure and simple truth is the best way to respond.
Report Post »tootsie roll
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:53pmJohn C
Report Post »If you are a Chrstian then you know that ONLY GOD KNOWS A PERSON’S HEART.
Judgement is not for us but God. Rev. Graham was correct. Also you know that God is in
control and whoever God choose’s will win the election. Unless of course there is voting fraud.
People should be concerned more about VOTING FRAUD THAN WHETHER OR NOT MITT IS A
CHRISTIAN IN HIS BELIEFS. Just look at what Obama has done to hurt this country. Do you consider
his actions as Christian actions?
I-HATE-THE-WORD-DISENFRANCHISE
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:55pmI wonder if he told his followers to not vote for any dem. and all most none of the republicans. I have a hard time believing a Christain could win an electiion. The only time 90+%of our current politicians use the name GOD is in an election and cuss words. So, I guess what he‘s saying is if your a Christain don’t vote.
Report Post »ozchambers
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:10pmI believe in The Bible. Jesus is my Lord. Christianity is my faith. I’m looking for a president who believes in the Constitution. If he follows the Constitution, his decision to follow Jesus, Buddha, or L. Ron Hubbard is his business. It’s called freedom of religion. Let’s respect it.
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:23pm@MyFaith …Elijah Abell the first black elder was ordained on March 3 or 8th, 1836 in Kirtland, Ohio by Joseph Smith.
As was his son Enoch was ordained 11.27.1900 and grandson Elijah was ordained 9.29.1935
@ONE OF MANY
You’re not misinformed, you are uninformed..but you are correct in one regard– LDS do not believe in the same Jesus Christ you do. LDS believe in the Christ testified by the holy scriptures or sacred text of the bible …not the book that was given to you by Roman Christianity to perpetuate the grostesque and twisted mingled concepts born of Roman Imerial Edicts from blended Greek and Pagan phylosophies. I was Southern Baptist, First Baptist of Dallas with WA Criswell— I was moved against Christ’s true Church just as you, and i asked one question of curiosity that led me to my conversion.
Report Post »The National Council of Churches note the LDS church population tripled in twenty years and is the fastest growing church in the US, and on the earth, while Southern Baptist, Chruch of Christ, Pentacostal, Episcopal, Presbytarianism, Catholicism and Lutheran are steady losing “customers”.
It’s because people ask questions of their paid pastors they can not truthfully answer.
I appreciate the interest and effort each of you demonstrate for strengthening the LDS missionary opportunities….the more ridiculous comments anti-mormon’s bolster….the more conversion Christ true church enjoys.
hidden_lion
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:31pmThe scriptures do not say anything about who to vote for…
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:37pm(Continued) To all Non-Mormons
The New Testament offers no personal text by replacement Apostles Matthias, Barnabas, James the Brother of Christ, Apollos, Silas and Timothy. Of the twenty-seven books which comprise the New Testament, thirteen were attributed to the Apostle Paul, a Roman citizen. Besides the thirteen books accredited to Paul, the Epistle to the Romans positioned in chronological disorder following “The Acts” may not be merely coincidental but representative of Roman subjection and influence. In contrast, Paul’s dedication to record keeping would be consistent of Apostleship commitment to preserve the Gospel and church authority with written record for prosperity.
Historical events attest to the challenges our Christian fore-fathers experienced that would frustrate the preservation of sacred texts. Initially, extensive logistically arduous journeys and persecution of the Apostles, significantly decreased opportunity to exchange and safeguard records. Over time, independent actions of regional church authorities, generational persecution and suppression from Roman Imperial Edicts and ecclesiastical authoritarianism denouncing and destroying sacred texts that failed to substantiate creeds and canons were prelusions permitting sacred writings to be lost or burned or otherwise intentionally discarded.
(Cont) 2 of 3
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:44pm(Cont) 3 of 3
To all non-Mormons
1 Corinthians 14:33 reminds us “God is not the author of confusion”. Many verses throughout the Bible present inconsistency, contradiction and error that challenge any debate of divine inspiration of the chosen compilation. The individual writings of biblical prophets were indeed inspired, but the selected works of the bible was the product of uninspired, politically goal-oriented men and can not be dismissed. These events, as follows, would finalize the great apostasy by diminishing gospel authenticity, continuity of church organization and priesthood authority through man’s failure to maintain and observe principles from sacred texts.
Thus we see Satan’s defiant promise to “mingle scripture with the precepts of man.”
Im rather pumped presently–I’m certain that all many of you will receive from the preceding comments are …”lets pick-out his typos” which would be unfortunate.
We live in a time when all information is available to us, and yet men still wilt from intelligence because of pride– no one wishes to admit they may be incorrect. The gospel is sooo much more than the man-made bible delivers. That is precisely why in our Articles of Faith we say “We believe the Bible to be the word of God, as long as it is translated correctly”
Report Post »thegrassroots
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:41pmSo, what does Andrew do if there isn’t a Christian candidate? Does he just not vote? And, if not, how patriotic of him.
First Vanderplaats and now Andrew, a couple of low-on-the-totem-pole guys pushing promotion of themselves by trying to bring down a couple of much higher profiled, honorable ones = Michele Bachmann and Franklin Graham.
Jesus had a great opportunity to denigrate “non-Christian” officials, But He Didn’t! In Matthew 22:15-21 the Pharisees were trying to trip Him up. They sent some of their peeps to ask Jesus: “… Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” Jesus asked to see the tax money, “So they brought Him a denarius. And He said to them, ‘Whose image and inscription is this?’ They said to Him, ‘Caesar’s.’ And He [Jesus] said to them, ‘Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.’ ”
It’s not wise to blindly believe those who claim to be Christian leaders. Check out everything they say with what the Bible says. If the Bible disagrees with them, those “Christian leaders” should be ignored.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:46pmDARREN, what redemptive purpose is served by believing in a faux history of the Americas?
Report Post »snooop1e
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:11pmHere’s a question for the group, what about voting for a candidate who is openly in favor of abortion, gay marriage and/or partial birth abortions? Can we as Christians vote for that candidate simply because we believe he/she will do a good job?
Report Post »kaydeebeau
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:13pm@Hiddenlion – might want to read Titus and several of Pauls letters before making such an uninformed comment – actually the Torah is pretty filled with what a government leader is supposed to be so effectvely the scriptures do say what a leader is to be and therefore does instruct us as to what to look for and thus to vote accordingly
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:15pmIndeed, how is the gospel of Jesus Christ illuminated by this supposed history of Nephites and Lamanites? Answer: It is not! It is an addition. It is “another gospel” by it’s own words. Testament, in its biblical use, is a covenant between God and humans. This “other” testament is then an “other” covenant.
Anyone who preaches to you an “other” gospel is cursed!
Galatians 1:8
Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you. (New Living Translation)
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. (English Standard Version)
But even if we or an Angel from Heaven should evangelize you outside of that which we have evangelized you, we or he would be damned. (Aramaic Bible in English)
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (King James Version)
QUESTION: What kind of evangelism was the angel Moroni engaging in? Golden Plates? Faux history?
Mormonism has deceived many. The enemy’s way of detracting from the true gospel.
Beware the baloney from the cursed Moroni!
Whoever tells you good news that is different from the Good News we gave you should be condemned to hell, even if he is one of us or an angel from heaven. GWT
Report Post »CharlesReese
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:22pmJohn,
Christ did not pay for our sins on the cross first of all. He did that in the Garden of Gethsemane as recorded in the New Testament. ST. Matthew 26: 39-44; ST. Luke 22: 40-44 He died on the cross. Why do you not understand why Latter-day Saints don’t have crosses? The Romans used the cross as a tool of death. Christ lives! Why do you need a cross to remind you of His death? You should be looking for truth. Your not going to find truth by listening to lies being betrayed by your pastor who claims to be a Christian and condemning Latter-day Saints as being cult members. By definition you are cult member if you follow your pastor who has just started a new church. How hard is that to understand? So for bigots/hypocrites who practice priestcraf, you had better take a good look at the definition of the “word” cult.
Report Post »markie_man1956
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:28pmMormons don’t believe that Jesus was God in the flesh. In other words, they don’t believe in the Trinity. Now, I think it IS possible for a person who claims to be a Mormon to be a Christian in the sense that they believe that Jesus is the atoning sacrifice for their sins and yet not understand the teachings of the Mormon church. Any created being is not capable of making that sacrifice since the entire creation was subject to God’s wrath because of sin. Only God Himself, in the person of Jesus Christ, is able to make that atonement. That’s where Christians part ways with Mormons. In fact just about any cult of Christianity parts ways with Biblical orthodoxy at the cardinal doctrine of the Trinity. Mormons, as I understand it, believe that Jesus was actually the archangel Michael prior to His incarnation. If Jesus was Michael the angel, then He was not who He Himself claimed to be here on earth. In fact, His claim of being God in flesh are what instigated the Sanhedrin against Him and gave the Romans the excuse to crucify him. Now, does being a Mormon disqualify a person from being the President? That’s pretty much up to you to decide. But I’ve seen a lot of error in this comment stream and I wanted to maybe clear some of that up.
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:45pm@ WSGAC,
I wrote an outline (3of3) concerning historical nature for the origin of the Bible and you fail to comment. Unfortunate that I should waste effort in explanation that would challenge your ignorance and upon the other individuals who avoids truth. If you wish to remain satisfied with limited ecclessiastical understanding I am willing to accept that is your position. However, allow those whom wish to worship God in with their agency the right to do so without your persecution. If you wish to learn and compare points for debate, all LDS will welcome the opportunity.
Otherwise, let it be known that you will remember—the Blogs from the Blaze clearly show the true Christians on this site are LDS…everyone else as limited testimony of true Christianity.
Report Post »PASSIONFORCHRIST
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:58pmHey John Coctostan: You need to listen to what he said! HE DIDN‘T CALL HIM A CHRISTIAN BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE’S NOT! HE SAID “YOU CAN CHOOSE TO ELECT A CHRISTIAN, BUT IF HE CAN‘T DO THE JOB IT DOESN’T MATTER IF HE’S A CHRISTIAN! LOOK AT THE ANTI AMERICAN WHO CLAIMS TO BE A CHRISTIAN RUNNING OUR COUNTRY NOW!!!!
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:02pmMarkieMann,….
Mormons do not identify the Savior as Michael the Archangel. Jesus is Christ separate from God the eternal Father.
You are correct we do not believe in the Trinity as was determined by Nicaea Council in 325 and re-defined at the Council of Constantonople 381.
The Trinitarian view or Creed was subjected to Greek and Roman phylosophies and Pagan mysticism, thus it is called the Trinity which was a defined identifying model of Pagan worship. Reminder that this word trinity is unmentioned in the Bible.
Following is the man-made Creed to define God
Report Post »“We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost.[But those who say: ‘There was a time when he was not” and “He was not before he was made” and “He was made out of nothing” or “He is of another substance” or “essence” or “The Son of God is created” or “changeable” or “alterable”—they are condemned by the holy cath
HippoNips
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:12pmHis quote is from a FAKE BIBLE……Yes, The New International Version which is a PARAPHRASED one, not a LITERAL translation all version writtend before it.
Report Post »The NIV was writteb BY socialists in the early 1970s , Check out all “christian” orgs that push socialism….they used the NIV including Obama’s “faith” guy Wallis
THE KING JAMES and before are what actual Chritians use.
adressler
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:34pmDon’t you get awfully tired of the Religious Spirit?! Of course God has his people everywhere, including the Mormon church; and it isn’t safe to assume that just because folks go to a church on the corner makes them a Christian. It’s definitely a “heart issue.” And fortunately for those of us who are Christians, God is much more gracious that we are!
Report Post »Mike204
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:44pmThe Book of Mormon is “another testament of Jesus Christ” from his “other sheep” (John 10:16). The name of the church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”. The vehement opposition to the “Mormon” church is because it puts the merchandisers of men’s souls out of business. The lie of being non-christian is inspired by the father of lies. Every counsel, sermon, and pronouncement in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is done “in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.”
Report Post »JohnnyLingo62
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:18pmHow do YOU know the hearts of the members of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints? I don’t know your heart, but I trust that my Savior does. I’m going with that. You really need to better understand what the LDS Church is based on – it’s not based on MORMON, it’s based on Jesus Christ. Evangelicals don’t have a patent on the term Christian or who is in faith and works acting like a Christian. If you read the Bible, you will find that the LDS Church is consistently based on the Bible – perhaps more so than any other church. Oh yeah, by the way, the Mormons don’t have a paid clergy – nope. Only a lay ministry – just like in the Bilble which decries priestcraft and judging others unrighteously. Pharisee would be a term you may want to study about also. I appreciate people of ALL faiths and know that God loves all His children in the whole world – not just evangelicals. Peace and Faith.
Report Post »thegrassroots
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:24pm@snooop1e
If that’s a serious question, you will find your answer in the Bible.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:43pmMormonism is a fraud. It is a false history of the Americas. Even Mormon scientists now realize this. The rest are simply burying their heads in the sand.
There were NO Nephites. There were NO Lamanites. There is no historical basis for the lie which is the Book of Mormon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tl6OoeJ8nM&feature=related
Report Post »Chuck Stein
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:50pmDiscussions about the nature of Jesus are very important — indeed, crucial to each person’s eternity. Such discussion, however, can generate a lot of heat without giving forth much light (such as asserting that another person believes in “a different Jesus” based upon a theological disagreement). While there is only one Jesus Christ, we mortals have adopted various understandings of Him.
Report Post »(1) Homoousian — Nicean (“Trinitarian”) Christians (the majority of Christians).
(2) Homoiousian — Christians who believe that Jesus and God the Father are of similar — but not the same — substance.
(3) Heteroousian — Christians who believe that the substance and nature of God the Father and Jesus are different.
Traditionally, Homoousian Christians have been less accepting of other Christians. Not that there’s anything WRONG with that.
bombshelterbob
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 10:16pmBigotry is as Bigotry does.
Report Post »superbyelich
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 10:39pmI’m going to abstain from voting for Mitt Romney not because he is Mormon, but because he is establishment. Establishment candidates are completely out for me. I am tired of the establishment leading us down the path of oblivion. That is all.
Report Post »Hobbs57
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 10:55pm@ WGAS or whatever your letters. You tell me this then .. Where did the people in the United Staes come from ? How did they get here ? When did they get here ? Since you are so smart. Nothing shy of the intellectual elite, or the radical Muslim, no joking. You wonder why there is a bashing of Christians in America, why there is a huge divide and why the lord has been driven out of our public square ?? Take a very LONG look in the mirror, because those who are so bent on their specific brand of Christianity being the only game in town is it ! I assure you, if you are a God fearing Christian, then you have NO faith. Faith and Fear can not exist together. The are direct opposites, one that is according to the dictates of the flesh, while the other according to the spirit. I have fallen away from the man made churches of today for this particular reason. I assure you, my relationship with the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ, and God are in perfect understanding and of intimite love and faith. I live my life accordingly and I assure you, few come close to my ways. I will point to you a million different ways that you are only justifying aspects of your life as being in line with according to the word of Jesus. I will show point to you all of the places in your life where you are acting on your will instead fo the spirit and playing God, disallowing his will to be done. I do it as well, it is impossible not to, but I am always aware of it as I am and know I suffer as a result
Report Post »HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:03pm@WSGAC
Report Post »If Mormonism is such a fraud, why can’t you argue against it without lying yourself?
You can summarize the BoM as a history, then qualify it as false if you choose at your own peril. But IF you have read it as you claim, you KNOW that your summary is not true. There are more mentions of the atonement of Christ in the BoM than there are in the New Testament. In order for you to make your claim, you would literally have had to skip every third verse. It’s NOT merely a history, but a precisely RELIGIOUS history: the history of God’s dealings with a Christ-worshiping civilization on the Americas (no one claims to know which or where, so evidence is pending on some things, NOT absent on many others).
But if you’ll be honest with yourself, one question you asked DOES have an obvious response. Biblical interpretation has spawned thousands of varieties of Christian denominations despite Paul’s injunction that we should have a unity of faith, that there be one faith, one Lord, one baptism. Large and legitimate differences still in debate range from the nature of God, mode of baptism, nature of life after death, nature of life before birth, end-times chronology, nature of grace (faith vs. works), and so on. The BoM provides a point of comparison which fixes many Biblical interpretations down to a single possibility, thus clarifying what the Bible meant. I’d say understanding the Bible better would be a useful function of any book.
WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:04pmLUKE611 said: “Historical events attest to the challenges our Christian fore-fathers experienced that would frustrate the preservation of sacred texts. Initially, extensive logistically arduous journeys and persecution of the Apostles, significantly decreased opportunity to exchange and safeguard records. Over time, independent actions of regional church authorities, generational persecution and suppression from Roman Imperial Edicts and ecclesiastical authoritarianism denouncing and destroying sacred texts that failed to substantiate creeds and canons were prelusions permitting sacred writings to be lost or burned or otherwise intentionally discarded.”
Mr.LUKE611, do you have any evidence of sacred texts lost or burned, or do Mormons like yourself just make this stuff up so as to validate the other stuff you make up….like secret gold plates from Gold Line!
Beware the baloney from Moroni, for moron is in his name!
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:20pmHOBBS57 said, “You tell me this then .. Where did the people in the United Staes come from ? How did they get here ? When did they get here ? Since you are so smart.”
I will tell you where they didn’t come from. They did not come from Israel. Native Americans come from East Asia. Haplo groups A, B, C, and D, which account for over 98% of all Native Americans, are found in North East Asia. None of the Haplo groups are found in Israel.
Strange, if the principal inhabitants of the Americas came from Israel, why don’t we find the same Native American haplogroups in Israel? Things that make you go, “Hmmmmmm!”
I won’t address the rest of your note, because it’s just dodging and trying to change the subject. The subject is the Book of Mormon, and the lies that have been exposed. Calling me divisive, or judgmental, or mean spirited, blah blah blah…etc. does not address the fraud which is the Book of Mormon.
Report Post »Patrick Henry II
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:30pmMormon’s biggest problem in becoming Christian; Mormonism uses a different Bible that is added to and taken away from. Unfortunately they do not have the oportunity to learn from the original Scriptures or direct translations.
Report Post »Romney’s problem is not being Mormon; it is being a big Government Progressive who wants to keep the tax code.
I would Vote for a Mormon long before I would vote for a Liberation Theology type. That is a communist colt.
Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:32pmWSGAC…..Ask and ye shall receive… here is the beginning of an arreviated list (1of 3)
A standard practice of Roman Imperial acts of persecution of the Christians was to burn their books and writings. This was also common practice of the Roman Empire in its desire to purge the teachings of Christianity, who were cited as enemies of the State. This is a list a specific Monarchal acts, Imperial Edicts and Governing bodies ordering books burned, imprisonment of Bishops and property confiscated. There are many acts of Christian persecution by Governing powers from the death of Stephen in Acts by the Sanhedrin (Jewish religious court) even through the Catholic Inquisition, but these are records in prelusion of biblical compilation.
168 BC – The Seleucid monarch Antiochus IV ordered the Books of the Law found in Jerusalem to be “rent in pieces” and burned – part of the series of persecutions which precipitated the revolt of the Maccabees. (1 Maccabees 1:56)
303 – The governor of Valencia offered a deacon, later to become Saint Vincent of Saragossa, to spare his life if he consigned his Scriptures to the fire. Vincent refused and was executed.
February 23rd, 303 – Roman Emperor Diocletian ordered the Christian church at Nicomedia to be razed, its scriptures burned, and its treasures seized. This was the day of the feast of Terminalia to honor Terminus; the god of boundaries. It was the day they would terminate Christianity.
(CONT)
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:34pm@HAPPYSTRETCHEDTHIN said, “Biblical interpretation has spawned thousands of varieties of Christian denominations despite Paul’s injunction that we should have a unity of faith, that there be one faith, one Lord, one baptism.”
And how would we know what Paul said unless the church passed it down to us? We have manuscript materials numbering in the thousands that demonstrate the New Testament letters and gospels were known and used in the early church. We have those manuscripts today.
Can you tell us where the manuscript materials are for the BoM? Nephites, I have read, were pretty sophisticated. Descendants of Israel, they must have had some form of Hebrew as their language. Strange, we have nothing in the way of scrolls or any writings that would back up the magic gold plates. Where is the cluture from whence these plates originated? We know just about every ancient city mentioned in the Old Testament, and where the remains exist today. Take Jericho, or Megiddo, or even Jerusalem…all mentioned in the OT, and all known today. Can you point similarly to any city mentioned in the BoM? Can you produce any writing from its people, any artifacts that would confirm the existence of so great a people called the Nephites? Nope, but instead you have to manipulate Quetzalcoatl pictures to confirm what never existed in the first place.
Mormonism is based on a fraud. Good people can be genuinely deceived. My not being nice about it doesn’t make your faith true
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:37pm(cont) WSGAC
325 – The books of Arius, a Christian presbyter from Alexandria, and his followers, were ruled as heresy after the first Council of Nicaea and burned. Arius was exiled and his books continued to be regularly burned into the 330s (See First Council of Nicaea).
367 – Athanasius the Bishop of Alexandria ordered monks in the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria to destroy all “unacceptable writings” in Egypt, the list of writings to be saved constituting the New Testament Athanasius a fierce defender of Trinitarian views gave strong condemnation of Arius at the First Nicaea Council 325 AD.
435 – The books of Nestorius, declared to be heresy, were burned under an edict of Theodosius II. The Greek originals of most writings were irrevocably destroyed, surviving mainly in Syriac translations.
(Barnes, Timothy D. – Constantine and Eusebius 22; Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1981)
Report Post »(Clarke, Graeme – Third-Century Christianity. In the Cambridge Ancient History, Volume XII: The Crisis of Empire – Bowman, Cameron, and Garnsey, NY; Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005)
(Prudentius, Peristephanon – “Crowns of Martyrdom”)
(Baynes, Norman H. – Two Notes on the Great Persecution. The Classical Quarterly 18:3–4, 1924)
(Liebeschuetz, J. H. – Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford University Press, 1979)
(Pomazansky, Michael – The Oneness of Essence, the Equality of Divinity, and the Equality of Honor of God the Son. Orthodox Dogmatic Theo
Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:53pmWSGAC…..and one for the road
Presently I am researching 19 other incidents of Roman Imperial actions of persecution, detailing destruction of sacred writings artifacts and otherwise sacred possessions of Ancient Christians from 1st centruy to 400 AD. The souther relm of the Roman empire taught what was credited as Arianism…Ariamism which was actually widespread generational Christian instruction taught throughout the first 4 centuries, held to consistant scripturial models of the Son-ship of Christ to God. Who was speaking of Christ from the Heavens at the Savior’s baptism?Who did Christ pray to in the Garden? Who did he pray to on the cross? Who did Stephen see in acts 7:56….
There are many other remnants of missing scriptures, lost scriptures mentioned in the Bible…keep in mind— the bible was translated from scrolls between 2nd and 4th centuries….long after the original authros died. Lets say the book of Mark…late 2nd century and Bbilical scholars continue to debate who wrote the original texts— was it Mark or did he have a scribe and who was it passed to?
Report Post »These idiosyncrasies can not be dismissed.
ConservativeCanucklehead
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:05amOf course Mormons (like P8RIOT) will proclaim their willingness to vote for an “Evangelical”. Mormons have always been seeking acceptance from mainstream Christianity, so their profession of allegiance to, or support of, an Evangelical candidate clearly serves that ambition.
Report Post »Mormons are desperate to transition from being the the bizarre, unwelcome step-child of Christendom.
Mitt Romney in the White House could go some way to legitimizing the whole nonsense of Moronism: the secret ceremonies, the magic underwear, the salamander spirit, the seeing stones, the curse of black skin, the numerous celestial wives that devout males will enjoy when they attain godhood and become overseers of their own planets (I’m actually starting to laugh out loud just typing this lunacy, so I gotta stop enumerating their nonsense).
Anywho, I don’t see how any self-respecting, born-from-above, bible-believing, mainstream Christian could ever cast a vote for anyone who finds wisdom in the drivel of Joseph Smith and friends.
BeckFan1941
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:12amHi John,
Report Post »I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I am a Christian. I joined the church at age 17. I love the Lord. I was baptised in the manner he was and I know he is my Savior and I love Him and I try to follow his commandments and when I mess up, I know his death allowed me to repent and He has promised to forgive and remember them no more. Millions of Mormons feel the same way I do and are good and decent people. We are in every walk of life in this country. We give much to Charity, we take care of our own and work hard to help our member not rely on the government for help when we can help them. I give every month to the Welfare program of the Church so help those less fortunate. We teach self reliant and live the laws of the land. You can read our Articule of Faith to know just what we believe as a people. Not all members are strong members but every faith has people that don’t live their religion. Go to lds.org and read our belief system. You seem like a man who would check it out for himself and not judge without giving an honest look. I am not trying to convert you, just understand more who we are and what we believe.
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:13am@WSGAC
Report Post »“And how would we know what Paul said…” > Wait, was that you admitting I’ve read and understood my Bible?
Luke’s doing an awesome job addressing your factual inaccuracies, and calling your bluff on the details. I’ll just deal with your faulty logic.
Did you know the Moses story was contested by some archaeologists? In the vast hieroglyphic archives we have logged and can interpret, there’s no solid mention of this Moses character, who, you would think from his fantastic story, would be all over their writings.
And how about that crazy story about Christ resurrecting? Josephus barely mentions the God who you’d think caused such a historical commotion that Josephus would be all over it.
Your logic goes like this: Bible is true because we know how it was transmitted to us. First off, that’s a pretty flimsy proof; Second that addresses none of the doctrines contained therein (which DO require some faith, no?); Third, the presence of multiple manuscripts only MUDDLES the provenance (ask ANY medievalist!)
Your logic also says: you haven’t positively IDed any relics, therefore all your claims are false. Non sequitur. It‘s like saying the bullet that matches the gun hasn’t been found yet, therefore the victim’s not dead. Nothing we know about pre-Columbian America specifically claims to refute the existence and details of BoM cultures either. One we know about could be it, we just haven’t made the positive ID yet.
p.s. Where’s Capernaum? Sodom? The Ark?
Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:30amWSGAC….as for myself “making stuff up as you Mormons do”…
That is far below my reputation and years. My expertise was long ago affixed before I accepted the gospel. I, as you, projected similiar venomous diatrade concerning the LDS church. I was young and chose to live as birds of a feather… reside in my ignorance and continue to pay my pastor to tell me every Sunday what I and my fellow parishioners believed. But at some point an educated man of faith seeks knowldge that he may acquire more faith for a hope of greater knowledge, and thus the cycle is never ending.
Report Post »Seek out the truth of all things my young friend,…can you not see the derision within your words is not from the Holy Spirit, the spirit of peace. Doesn’t the scriptures tell you to try all things? You have chosen debates which LDS have endured for many years, the same repititous perpetuated dogma that has been rebuked inumberable times. As I said before, there is a reason the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the fastest growing church since records were kept by and the National Council of Churches, and individuals as yourself and anti-LDS are the reason our missionaries are so successful. We have nothing to hide, we project no secret agenda—you wish to know what we say and do in the Temples, that info is available at the Library of Congress.
We, Mormons, believe in Christ; I was once So Baptist.. why would I downgrade and believe in something less than Christ?
wwwjr
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:50amJohn: How many angels fit on the head of a pin? Your comment is nitpicking and stupid.
Report Post »chubhub
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:12am@Luke611
Love your posts and comments – thank you for taking the time to write them… if you ever write a book on your findings, I would love to read it…
Report Post »MuskratProblem
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:33am@All the Christians here
Wow, you are all really stupid. I am a conservative agnostic with moral values, vote republican etc. Democrats constantly win because no one agrees to work with each other or will let arrogance guide voting habits. Thanks for continually reminding me why I do not join any of your churches…
Methodist = stupid
Baptist = stupid
Evangelist = stupid
Mormons = stupid
Organized Christian religions = stupid
Stop your bickering and work together against the Democrats.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:54amWSGAC;
“DARREN, what redemptive purpose is served by believing in a faux history of the Americas?”
None; but how do you declare unkown history faux? You continue this mellow diatribe as if you’re omniscience in history and science. That’s foolishness.
Besides, I’m not focused on the historical aspect fothe Book of Mormon per se. I’m focused on the gospel of Jesus Christ as contained in the Book of Mormon. It‘s veracity is confirmed not by man’s science; neither should the gospel of Jesus Christ in the Bible. It’s confirmed by the Holy Spirit of promise. The Holy Spirit knows the truth of al things. That includes things man’s science does not yet know.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:10amWSGAC;
“Testament, in its biblical use, is a covenant between God and humans. This “other” testament is then an “other” covenant. ”
By your own logic, the new Testament is also a new covenant. All you’re saying is that God made a new covenant in the Old World; so I ask why would He not make a new one in te New World? Why not bring forth a new covenant in these last days? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is a fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant which Christ contrinued forth in the New Testament. In the words of Daniel P. Goldman, coming unto Christ is simply a return to Isreal. The LDS church does not teach a new gospel in the sense of something adding something “strange” or “foreign” but rather by aggregating all the truth of the gospel as it once was and restoring it to earth.
And do not forget that Joseph Smith’s first message from a divine messanger regarding the gospel of Jesus Christ was not the Angel Moroni; but by the Son of God Himself.
“Whoever tells you good news that is different from the Good News we gave you should be condemned to hell, even if he is one of us or an angel from heaven. ”
Question regarding your biblical interpretations: how does an angel from *heaven* deceive people to hell? God’s angels deceive people? Please, enlighten me.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:22amMarkie;
“Mormons don’t believe that Jesus was God in the flesh. In other words, they don’t believe in the Trinity.”
Here: “5 For behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was, and is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from heaven among the children of men, and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay, and shall go forth amongst men, working mighty miracles, such as healing the sick, raising the dead, causing the lame to walk, the blind to receive their sight, and the deaf to hear, and curing all manner of diseases.’ (Mosiah 3).
Note your justification saying Mormon’s do not believe that “Jesus was God in the flesh” when their doctrine clearly teaches He was. Your cited justification was the Hoyl Trinity. There is no biblical support for the concept fothe Holy Trinity. What the bible does teach is that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one, but to declare that this is a “Holy Trinity” is nothing more than man’s philosophy. So, what you did was to take man’s philosophy and use it in place of the revealed fwrod of God as if it were the revealed word of God. I exhort you caution in doing so. The LDS Church fully believe in God’s oness. That the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are indeed One God though it is inunity and purpose.
(con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:29am(con’t);
“Any created being is not capable of making that sacrifice since the entire creation was subject to God’s wrath because of sin.”
Here’s what the LDS believe regarding the atonement and the eternal nature of Christ: “10 For it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice.” (Alma 34); when speaking of Christ’s baptism, Nephi said, ” 7 Know ye not that he was holy? But notwithstanding he being holy, he showeth unto the children of men that, according to the flesh he humbleth himself before the Father, and witnesseth unto the Father that he would be obedient unto him in keeping his commandments” (2 Nephi). The infinite and eternal sacrifice was carried out by Jesus Christ, Son of the Most High God. That very Jesus carried out the will ofthe Father in all things. He was “holy”, under no condemnation whatsoever.
As for Jesus being created, as you previously read, the LDS believe that, yes, at “some point” Jesus was created but as a matter of faith and worship, Jesus was with the Father and will be with the Father “from eternity to all eternity”.
(con’t)
Report Post »IMPEACH GEORGE SOROS!!
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:39amOk. The comments here are laughable. I live in Las Vegas. Mormons are all over the place here. I work with two. They believe in Jesus. Grow up. They aren’t boogymen. They just believe that Jesus went on a world tour. Something I joke about with my two co-workers and they are not offended. The fact that Romney is a Mormon is NOT the issue. The fact that he is a RINO is my problem with him.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:40am(con’t);
When Jesus was created we read, “24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; 25 And we will aprove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;” (Abraham 3). Of all God’s creations, there was one “like unto God”. This is the eternal nature of Christ, “like unto God”.
In LDS theology, all things were created by God the Father and through the Son. They are, and always have been One God. From the biginning the Word was “like unto God” and so it is solidly believed in LDS faith and worship that Christ was holy and carried out an “infinite and eternal sacrifice” on our behalf for our sins. the Father knew from the beginningthat man will not choose right and therefore prepared a way, from before the foundation of this world, to repent and return to Him, sanctified and holy again.
“Mormons, as I understand it, believe that Jesus was actually the archangel Michael prior to His incarnation.”
That was an idea offered by I think Brigham Young who never thought it important enough to pursue. But in official LDS canon, Jesus was YHWH, Son of Elohim, the Most High God.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:03amWSGAC;
First off, there are no known original records ofthe old Testament, nor the New Testament. The earliest records are, as have been pointed out to you, of the 2nd century AD or perhaps later. Also, by your argument, you would have it in for Moses whose writings were used to give an account of the creation, centuries after it happened. You’d say “beware ofthe moses molasses. Where’s the archeological evidence of millions of Jews crossing the desert over 40 years to arrive in Isreal? Where’s all the rescords regarding the creation?” I say this because today there are NONE. But, it is not by man’s science by which you know he was a true prophet of God, is it?
As for the Nephites and Lamanites, you are correct in that there is no known historical or archeological record of either of these groups exisiting. however, what of the story of Lehi, patrirch of both the Lamanites and the Nephites?
I direct you to the works of Margaret Barker whose scholarly works into the First Temple of Palestine is unparalleled as far as I know. The First Temple was said to have been “restored” by King Josiah by getting rid of all the pagan idols of Baal. Barker, however, offeres a much different version. The text we have today of Josiah are the Masoretic texts. These texts, says, Barker, were preserved by Deuteronomists who advocated a strict monotheistic view of God thus why Jews today are strictly monotheists. (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:13am(con’t);
If King Josiah was such a great and righteous king, Barker purports, then it is vey odd that Isreal was scattered a mere 11 years after his reign under King Zedekiah, a very wicked king which everyone agrees. Furthermore, Barker cites passages in Jeremiah which conflict with the Masoretic texts declaring Josiah’s righteousness. Barker says that Josiah did not rreform the First Temple but delifiled it to start a strict monotheistic approach to God. Thus Josiah erased teachings of God (Elohim, the most High God) and of God’s Son (YHWH, Son of Elohim, God Most High) and combined Elohim and YHWH to become one and the same God. (This goes far to corraborate Luke6111′s claim – a correct claim in my opinion – that the Bible was indeed corrupted).
It is under king Zedekiah which the story of Lehi begins. Barker’s works lead her to conclude that righteous people, those who remained faithful to the worship of the First Temple pre-Josiah’s ransacking of it, who could not stay in Jerusalem lest tey feared for their lives. Barker says that these faithful groups tended to travel southward and continued to receive revelation from God and were guided to promised lands. What was Lehi’s account? That he and his family travelled southward, continued to receive revelation from God and were lead to a promise land. You can read more of Barker’s words regarding her scholarly research and the Book of mormon in my next post. (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:18am(con’t);
Before inking you to ore of Margaret Barker‘s words I’d like to point out that her scholarly work is very much archeological evidence of the veracity of the Book of Mormon. Also, at a conference in Provo, UT, Barker said that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Jesus Christ of the Book of Mormon
Enjoy your reading:
http://www.joehunt.org/joseph-smith-margaret-barker-talk.html.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:20amInpeach George Soros;
“They just believe that Jesus went on a world tour.”
Now that is funny. :>)
Thanks for your words.
Report Post »Andy
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:57amRom 10:9 If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Report Post »Rom 10:10 One believes with the heart, resulting in righteousness, and one confesses with the mouth, resulting in salvation.
dcart888
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 8:35amAs a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints it is so hypocritical for so called “Christians” to judge others faith. I as a Mormon was taught in Sunday School Matthews 7! Perhaps all you “Christians” need to go back to Sunday School? While you are at it please read Article VI
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:26am@HAPPYSTRETCHEDTHIN said, ” Your logic goes like this: Bible is true because we know how it was transmitted to us. First off, that’s a pretty flimsy proof; Second that addresses none of the doctrines contained therein (which DO require some faith, no?); Third, the presence of multiple manuscripts only MUDDLES the provenance (ask ANY medievalist!)”
Reply: You don‘t know what you’re talking about…obviously you missed my point. And BTW, multiple manuscripts muddles nothing. If you knew anything of the manuscripts you would know better than to say such a thing.
HPS said, “Your logic also says: you haven’t positively IDed any relics, therefore all your claims are false. Non sequitur. It‘s like saying the bullet that matches the gun hasn’t been found yet, therefore the victim’s not dead.”
Reply: There is plenty from archeology which substantiates the Old and New Testaments. Your faux rational of my logic shows your own faulty logic.”
HPS said, “Nothing we know about pre-Columbian America specifically claims to refute the existence and details of BoM cultures either. One we know about could be it, we just haven’t made the positive ID yet.”
Reply:Nothing we know about pre-Columbian America refutes the existence of Martian’s colonizing the area either.
HPS asked, “p.s. Where’s Capernaum? Sodom? The Ark?”
Reply: Capernaum is located on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee. Sodom is in the Dead Sea area. The ark was kept in t
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:49amDARREN said, “As for the Nephites and Lamanites, you are correct in that there is no known historical or archeological record of either of these groups exisiting. however, what of the story of Lehi, patrirch of both the Lamanites and the Nephites?”
REPLY: Now we’re getting somewhere. But what of the story of Lehi? If he was a prophet who hailed from late 6th century BC Jerusalem, from the tribe of Manasseh, as BoM says, then he must have spoken Hebrew. And certainly his sons Nephi and Laman must have spoken it as well, otherwise dad could not have been understood by the youngsters. And certainly the sons and daughters of Nephi and Laman must have spoken some form of Hebrew. So then, we should have some linguistic evidence of Hebrew, or derivative, being the language of these supposed great nations of Lehi?
Can you show anything linguistic, or archeological, that illustrates some form/derivation of Hebrew as the language of Native Americans (Lamanites)? If Nephites were as sophisticated and as numerous as the sands of the sea, as reported in BoM, then we should certainly have something in the way of Israelite heritage found in Nephite ruins, writings, remains? Where are these ruins and remains? Where is the ancient Nephite script? We find such things from 6th Century BC Israel, so why not the same from this great Nephite nation? And why don’t Native Americans speak in some Hebrew dialect, or derivative?
There is nothing there. Reason? – It was never there to be
Report Post »DavidZion
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:02amPeople approach their belief with idiocy learn the BIBLE go to at least one year of BIBLE school.
We don’t live under the OLD LAW (TESTAMENT). 2 Chronicles is OLD TESTAMENT (LAW). Under the OLD law WE CHRISTIAN should be PUT TO DEATH. JESUS was put to death under the OLD law and he walked in fulfillment of the LAW. ALL sin entered the world thru one man Adam. All sin was paid for by God in the flesh walking on this earth as A MAN JESUS.
Report Post »southern_oak
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:16amThese teachings of the Mormon church are a few of her false doctrines that are contrary to the Holy Bible.
•God used to be a man on another planet, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333).
•God resides near a star called Kolob, (Pearl of Great Price, p. 34-35; Mormon Doctrine, p. 428).
•”The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s…” (Doctrines and Covenants 130:22).
•”God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).
•After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god, (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354.)
•God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).
• The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35.).
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:43amA simple cartoon can make the teachings of the Mormon church readily known. Of course the cartoon has been banned by the Mormon church, but with no correction of the beliefs uncovered. Instead they ban and bury it, knowing that Joseph Smith in fact taught such embarrassing rubbish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q6brMrFw0E
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:06pmSouthern_Oak, the only thing you said that is ACTUALLY part of official LDS doctrine is that the Godhead is three separate entities.
Most of the others are from interpretation of a line which isn’t even in the Book of Mormon, but rather the Doctrine and Covenants (written by modern men). “As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become.” These are not accepted interpretations in official doctrine, though many Mormons believe them.
Again, let me reiterate, the Doctrine and Covenants, while important to Mormons, is not part of the Book of Mormon (the second testament of Jesus Christ, which compliments the Holy Bible). It is a compilation of writings of Mormon prophets.
Regardless of all that, the only thing that is “contradicted” is your own interpretation of the Bible, which has been taught to you by men. Unless, of course, you have been lucky enough to have knowledge endowed upon you by God Himself.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:20pmWSGAC, the ancestors of Lehi joined a much larger culture, which already existed in the Americas. In other words, there were already large civilizations (obviously) when they arrived. Thus, it is far more likely that they adopted the native languages and culture, not visa versa. The Nephites were in a religious minority and were ultimately eradicated completely.
Look up the Hopewell culture, it is quite intriguing if you know the story of the Book of Mormon.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:55pmSorry FREEDOMPURVEYOR, but your Hopewell Indians don‘t account for the word in your BoM that speak of the Americas as being unknown to the nations when Ol’ Lehi arrived, nor the supposed offspring of Nephi which numbered more than the sands of the sea. One little indian tribe doesn‘t work for your book’s testament regarding these things.
Report Post »ConservativeCanucklehead
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:12pmFREEDOMPURVEYOR wrote:
Report Post »“… the Doctrine and Covenants, while important to Mormons, is not part of the Book of Mormon (the second testament of Jesus Christ, which compliments the Holy Bible). It is a compilation of writings of Mormon prophets.”
Are you really suggesting that because those bizarre teachings are contained within the “writings of Mormon prophets” they should not be considered truly Mormon? SERIOUSLY?
So those Mormon “prophets” were spewing out a bunch of nonsense that is not consistant with sound Mormon doctrine or theology. They were not further illuminating the truths of Mormonism. Yet they were “prophets”?
Uhhh, do you really not see a problem with that sort of ‘reasoning’?
Maybe that’s just one more difference between Mormons and Christians. Christians call the writings of prophets “scripture”, not some sort of silliness that can be disregarded whenever it’s convenient.
Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:31pm@CHUBHUB
Thank you.. I sincerely appreciate the compliment. However, it doesn’t take much time to cut and paste, but it takes considereable time for me to tyoe the original text.
Report Post »These items I have posted are presently writ and compiled; a compilation of biblical origin,the metamorphysis of Christianity with the threatened ancient phyosophies of the period accompanied with editorials concerning gospel topics with sustain scriptures. There is also a section concerning historical discovery within MesoAmerica substantiating prehistoric elements correlating with LDS examinations.It is a reference text deisgned for a missionary tool and teachers.
I was once an anti -mormon….its my way of repenting.
nbeecf
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:37pm@MARKIE_MAN1956
Mormons do not believe that Jesus Christ was Michael the angel. We believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. We believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. Jesus Christ, being God’s Son, was able to make the ultimate sacrifice for us.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:03pm“…word in your BoM that speak of the Americas as being unknown to the nations when Ol’ Lehi arrived”
Have you read it? It says that there were already civilizations, and the Nephites encountered them. It also says that thousands years earlier, the Jaredites were sent by God to the Americas and were subsequently destroyed.
“..nor the supposed offspring of Nephi which numbered more than the sands of the sea. One little indian tribe doesn‘t work for your book’s testament regarding these things.”
It says that the Nephites were completely destroyed. Every single one was killed. The Hopewell culture existed all along the Mississippi and disappeared around 400-500 AD. It was hardly “one little tribe.”
“So those Mormon “prophets” were spewing out a bunch of nonsense that is not consistant with sound Mormon doctrine or theology.”
I never said it was nonsense, did I? I simply said that it was written by modern men and is completely subject to interpretation.
“Christians call the writings of prophets “scripture”, not some sort of silliness that can be disregarded whenever it’s convenient.”
Mormons call it scripture, and I’m not disregarding it. My point is that the basis of the Mormon faith, the Book of Mormon, does not include anything about God living on a special planet somewhere, or men becoming gods. That is a common misnomer and is not any part of the LDS belief system. It comes from an exaggerated interpretation of the writing of
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:10pmLUKE611 said, “There is also a section concerning historical discovery within MesoAmerica substantiating prehistoric elements correlating with LDS examinations.It is a reference text deisgned for a missionary tool and teachers.”
Reply: Then let’s have it. If Nephite cities were as numerous as stated in the BoM; if the Nephite people were as numerous as the sands of the sea, to the land east, west, north and south, then produce one by its name. And please don’t play fast and loose with Quetzalcoatl, or forcing bizarre interpretations of mesoamerican glyphs to fit phony Mormon history.
Come on, produce something of these great “nations of Lehi” that shows their existence, language and culture. Think “Hebrew”! We should find something that has a connection to 6th C. BC Israel, and the Hebrew of that time. Can you produce one thing? Anything?
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:17pm@FREEDOMPURVEYOR, if the great Nephite nation was completely destroyed, then we should find a great imprint of its greatness in the archeological record. Where are the cities, culture, language from this great nation? If Nephi was son of Lehi, who himself was from Jerusalem, then Hebrew or a form of Hebrew would have been the language of the Nephites and Lamanites (both offspring of Lehi).
Can you show any evidence that Hebrew or derivative of Hebrew was the language of the Hopewell Indians, or any Indians (ie. Native Americans)? Language is culture, and culture is expressed in language. What are the languages of mesoamerica, and where are the writings that would connect these people to 6th C. BC Israel?
Report Post »G.W. Dobbs
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:34pmYou voted and elected a MUSLIM but you complain about a man who professes Jesus? How STUPID can you get?
Report Post »SOCstar
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:47pmThat statement is true of all churches. How do you know the heart of the evangelical who draws near to God with his lips, but his heart is far from Him? How can you say the heart of a Mormon who adores, worships, and abides by the teachings of the very same Jesus?
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:31pmWSGAC;
“So then, we should have some linguistic evidence of Hebrew, or derivative, being the language of these supposed great nations of Lehi?”
Language is very fluid and can change very quickly. Is there anyone who can speak any language pre-Aztec? Pre-Mayan? Read the ancient Mayan or Aztec glyphs? The answer is no to all yet we know all existed. A major reason, or highly reasonable probability, that these languages are not spoken or legible today is because the Spaniards did an amazing job destroying the pagan wrks they encountered. What does the Book of Mormon teach us regarding their ancient civilization? That it was completely destroyed. You’re assuming that the continuty of the Old World must have ocurred in the New World. The Book of Mormon also speaks about the dramatic alteration of Hebrew s well as Egyptian.
Reasoning that there is no evidence of Hebrew in the Americas because it never existed is, historically seaking possible but hardly conclusive. Heck, theologically speaking it could be that God does not want His children to rely on archeology or history to know the Book of Mormon is true. After all, look what it‘s done ot people’s witness of the Bible. On The Blazes‘ pages I hear far more testimony of the Bible’s truthfulness from a scientific standpoint than from a person witness ofther Holy Spirit. I say that this is the course to take.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:37pm“Where are the cities, culture, language from this great nation?”
The Hopewell built defensive forts, in which they surrounded their towns with dirt mounds topped with wooden palisades. They had a vast system of roads and trade, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico all the way to Canada. The description of Nephite defensive structures in the Book of Mormon coincides with these forts.
As for language, is it so hard to believe that the descendants of Lehi learned the language of the prevailing culture, and lost their own? Why would you expect Hebrew to survive at all? Just try to imagine the effect of a small group of people on an existing civilization of thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands.
Religion is the only thing that was important for the Nephites to retain, and their religion disappeared when they were eradicated – except for the record on the plates, which is the Book of Mormon.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:54pmDARREN said, “Language is very fluid and can change very quickly. Is there anyone who can speak any language pre-Aztec? Pre-Mayan? Read the ancient Mayan or Aztec glyphs? The answer is no to all yet we know all existed.”
Uhhh, sorry, but you’re wrong. Language changes, but there are still connections. All of the Romance languages are based on Latin. They are different than Latin, but they are easily traceable because they are connected to Latin. And Hebrew is pretty unique. Could you please demonstrate this language “fluidity” in Hebrew? For example, take the Masoretic text (7th – 11th Century AD), and the Dead Sea Scrolls texts (250 – 65 BC) and show examples of how fluid the Hebrew language was through those centuries in between.
If Lehi was a good Jew, or member of the tribe of Manasseh, then he would have spoken Hebrew and written in Hebrew, trained well in the courts of King Zedekiah. Lehi’s sons would have spoken Hebrew, and their sons, and their sons. We would expect to see some change in the language, but still traceable.
Aztec and Mayan glyphs are not Hebrew. Not even close.
What was the language of the great Nephite nation? Why don’t any of the Native American languages have any connection to Hebrew?
Things that make you go “Hmmmmmmmm!”
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:58pmFREEDOMPURVEYOR said, “As for language, is it so hard to believe that the descendants of Lehi learned the language of the prevailing culture, and lost their own? Why would you expect Hebrew to survive at all?”
When language is lost, so is culture. If they morphed into the prevailing culture, then how did they have a culture of their own that would have/maintain any connection with Israelite? I mean, you call them chosen people for a reason, don’t you?
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:09pm“When language is lost, so is culture. If they morphed into the prevailing culture, then how did they have a culture of their own that would have/maintain any connection with Israelite? I mean, you call them chosen people for a reason, don’t you?”
Did you read what I said? Religion is what is important, not language. God did not send Lehi to the Americas so that they would teach everyone Hebrew.
You do not lose religion when you lose language. If that were the case, Germans who immigrated to America would have stopped being Lutheran. Instead, they started several churches which thrive to this day, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:16pmFREEDOMPURVEYOR said, “The Hopewell built defensive forts, in which they surrounded their towns with dirt mounds topped with wooden palisades. They had a vast system of roads and trade, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico all the way to Canada. The description of Nephite defensive structures in the Book of Mormon coincides with these forts.”
Defensive forts, towns, dirt mounds do not confirm anything. We find similar structures from all types of people throughout history. What I want to know is the culture of these Hopewell Indians, and one of the distinguishing marks of a culture is its language and writing.
Please demonstrate a cultural connection between Hopewell Indians and the people of 5th C. BC Judea. The quickest place to go would be the language. So, again, please demonstrate the connection of Hopewell Indian language and Hebrew. I know the Lamanites are called and “idle people, full of mischief” in the BoM, but they still had a language given to them. What was it?
And back to the Nephites. The people may have been utterly destroyed, but there would be remnants in archeology. The city of Megiddo in Israel has some 26 layers to it. Over the millenia it has been destroyed and rebuilt at least 26 times. We have access to all those layers. If Nephites built great cities across the land (as BoM says), then where are these great cities, corresponding to Megiddo or Jericho or Jerusalem?
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:24pmFREEDOMPURVEYOR said, “You do not lose religion when you lose language. If that were the case, Germans who immigrated to America would have stopped being Lutheran. Instead, they started several churches which thrive to this day, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.”
Granted, but you missed my point. What was the religion of the Lamanites? What is the religion of the present day descendents of the Lamanites?
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 4:50pm“Please demonstrate a cultural connection between Hopewell Indians and the people of 5th C. BC Judea.”
I don’t have to demonstrate such a connection, and I highly doubt one would exist. By the time the Hopewell disappeared, almost a thousand years had passed since Lehi’s arrival with a small boat of people.
Besides that, religion is based on faith, not scientific proof. If God wanted to prove that he exists, he would simply descend from the heavens and say “here I am.”
If you can prove that the Hopewell were definitely not the Nephites of the Book of Mormon, that is fine. Lack of evidence, however, is not proof of absence.
“The people may have been utterly destroyed, but there would be remnants in archeology.”
No where in the Book of Mormon does it say that the Nephites built great cities of stone. They constructed their cities of wood, which does not survive. The Hopewell constructed their cities with wood, a plentiful resource in America. The mounds and certain rare artifacts are all that remain.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 5:10pm“Granted, but you missed my point. What was the religion of the Lamanites? What is the religion of the present day descendents of the Lamanites?”
The Lamanites endeavored to destroy the Nephites and their religion, and eventually succeeded. Whatever their religion, it was far removed from that of the Nephites, to be sure.
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 5:54pmWSGAC…..
You’re not interested in “one” thing evidenciary of propositon in discovery. If so you would have gave deliberate reply to my previous messages concerning the Bible Origin and the asimilation between Pagan practices, Greek Phylosophy, and Christianity. You are tempting me to place a name, date, and address on a relic, artifact, or structure into unrealistic specificity that you will not offer or accept in proving Bible claims. Nevertheless, traditions from the Mesoamerica tribes were a threat to the Roman Catholic Church and thus, orders to destroy records and artifacts were the practice.
Fray Diego de Landa, Bishop of Yucatan in July 11-21st, 1562, upon conquering the Mayan by the Spanish – order all sacred books burned and destruction of artifacts of the Maya throughout the Mayan Empire. Records dispute quantity but history proposes over 80 large assembled incased texts. Following is the journal entry of Landa”
Report Post »“We found a large number of books in these characters and, as they contained nothing in which were not to be seen as superstition and lies of the devil, we burned them all, which they (the Maya) regretted to an amazing degree, and which caused them much affliction.”
This reference can be found in the book written by Clendinnen, Inga – Maya and Spaniard in Yucatan, 1517–1570. Cambridge University Press, 2007. Sponsorship to view the book in the Library is required,…I am certain you are not a student or alumni; you will need my
DisillusionedDaily
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:00pmHaving attended a Mormon (LDS) church for about a year, I have no doubts about their Christianity. They are as much Christians as any group of persons I have ever dealt with. I left the faith because there were a few of their rules I did not agree with, but I have never seen or heard anything that would make me doubt their Christianity. On the other hand, I was denied membership in an Assembly of God church because of an earlier divorce after being subjected to a very stringent review of my life. I now have doubts about the practice of Christianity by the followers of the Assembly of God and I will not enter into one of their churches.
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:23pmWSGAC (CONT)
2. National Museum of Anthropology, Mexico City exhibits a gold plate discovered at Papantla, in the state of Vera Cruz, resembling the gold plates that Joseph Smith claimed to have translated into the Book of Mormon. The artifact shows a bearded man holding the plates as if proclaiming aloud what he reads. Most anthropologists believe that pre-Columbian native-Americans had no facial hair. Could this be an item commemorating the legend of the Great White Bearded God – Quetzalcoatl?
As for the vast cities of Nephites and Lamanites….
Lets begin with Tulum Yucatan, the City of the Decsending (White God)
__Within the discovery is found an interesting tomb in the SHAPE OF THE CHRISTIAN CRUCIFIX
__A baptismal font. Walled itchings of born child grasping a staff with a serpent. This same __symbolism is common to Moses to sygnify Christ in the Old Testament.
__Most important, A scene with a kneeling woman to a God who is presenting her with a BABY Descending God, who the Mayan’s recognized as the creator of man.
Can I expect replies to my preceding messages from the 22nd or do you wish for me to only prove your answers? That would be unfortunate; it would show disingenious action, dismissiveness or a evassive element of your character. You have presented challenges which have been irrevocably answered, I request you to show the same Christian integrity you demand in your post and reply to each of the items I preented,…otherwise you are a fraud.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:37pmWSGAC;
“A simple cartoon can make the teachings of the Mormon church readily known. Of course the cartoon has been banned by the Mormon church, but with no correction of the beliefs uncovered. Instead they ban and bury it, knowing that Joseph Smith in fact taught such embarrassing rubbish.”
Trillions of planets ruled by countless gods? Huh? I‘ve been an active LDS member for all fourty years of my life and I’ve yet to recall one time where I was taught that trillions of planets are out there (that by the way is quite scientifically acceptable) ruled by countless gods. I’ve always been taught that God rules everything, as LDS, I teach that God rules everything, and I will forever believe that God rules everything. The core of LDS faith and worship is to come unto the Father through the Son. That’s it, it’s that simple.
The only rubbish I saw was the carton itself. It’s all rubbish. If Joseph Smith taught this it is not in any first-hand account of his teachings that I know of. The only literature I am aware of which credits Joseph Smith teaching any such thing was recoded third party and it is unkown how many alterations it went through to get to where it is today. One thing’s for sure, there is no record of Joseph Smith seeing or approving such literature.
Funny how you use science when it conveniences you.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:45pmSouthern Oak;
- God being once like a human: It amazes me how consistantly people come to this site and say the exact same thing despite the frequent corrections to this false portrayal of Mormon faith and worship. There is no teaching that says God the Father was once a mortal man like us. nothing that He was born on another planet. nothing that He became an exalted being. Nothing of any sort. but the irony is that traditional Christianity believes that God was once like a mortal man and then became exalted. Mormons do not believe the Father 9Elohim) was once like a mortal man but Jesus (YHWH) was. traditional Christianity, as you correctly showed, believe that the Father and the Son are one and the same (physical) God and thus it is they who believe Gofd the Father was once like amortal man like us.
Since this is what they believe, why is it false for Mormons to believe it even thogh they don’t?
- Kolob: contradicts nothing in the Bible.
- Father having flesh and bone: You believe the son does, correct? But not the Father? And if the Father and the Son are the same physical God, how does God have flesh and bone but does not have flesh and bone. And if you believe it is the persons of God, where in the entire bible does it say that the Father is the first person and the Son the Second person of God? It doesn‘t that I’m aware of.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 6:52pmWSGAC;
“Sorry FREEDOMPURVEYOR, but your Hopewell Indians don‘t account for the word in your BoM that speak of the Americas as being unknown to the nations when Ol’ Lehi arrived”
Really? The Old World knew of the Americas in the 6th century BC? Who knew? You must really be good at that history stuff cuz the history I learned doesn’t say any such thing. ;>)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 7:02pmWSGAC;
The example of Hebrew you gave were examples of groups of people physically connected together. place a great body of water between the groups, let’s say, the Atlantic Ocean, and I promise you that within no time, the groups will begin to speak very differently one from another. And as I pointed out, the Book of Mormon itself says that their language was corrupted. in otherwords, the language they brought was significantly altered. This naturally happens with language. The Tower of Babel is a prime example of rapid language changes.
“Aztec and Mayan glyphs are not Hebrew. Not even close.”
Who said they were? They are, however, more egyptian in structure and it was “Reformed Egyptian” (Egyptian but significantly altered) which the Nephites kept their records. Did Joseph Smith know about the glyphs. And please do not say I’m trying to make a BoM connection, I’m not. I’m only pointing out that languages change and they can change rapidly and significantly.
I’d still like to know who you can cite that speaks and reads pre Aztec and Mayan languages.
And just because something happened in one manner in the Old World, does not mean it happened in the same manner in the New World.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 7:07pmLUKE611 – Give it up! Mayan ruins in the Yucatan have no connection with 6th Century BC Judea. I could easily produce cross shaped images from Egyptian glyphs, and see a baptismal font in the same. Your replies are truly bizarre!
If the Mayans in Yucatan are the BoM’s Nephites, then show us the language of the Mayan/Nephite’s. Lehi’s language was Hebrew. Lehi’s sons, Nephi and Laman also must have spoken Hebrew. Two nations came from these men, supposedly connected to the children of Israel through Lehi who was from Jerusalem. If Nephi and Laman passed down the true faith to their children, then the language they used was the language of their origin – Hebrew. If these same passed down to their children the covenants of their forefathers from Israel, then the children would learn the stories as Nephi and Laman were taught them. Over time a covenant community would form in the Americas which should look pretty Jewish in nature. Some form of Hebrew would exist…either written or spoken. Funny thing, we have nothing that looks or sounds close to Hebrew anywhere in the Americas.
You have yet to address this, much less irrevocably answer it. So cut with the pseudo intellectual bravado. Finding Jesus in a descending god on Mayan wall reliefs is hardly what archeologists would call a connection between 6th Century BC Judea and the Americas.
Show me Israel in the Americas. Begin with language, not glyphs. Israelites spoke Hebrew!
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 7:26pmDARREN said, “The example of Hebrew you gave were examples of groups of people physically connected together. place a great body of water between the groups, let’s say, the Atlantic Ocean, and I promise you that within no time, the groups will begin to speak very differently one from another. And as I pointed out, the Book of Mormon itself says that their language was corrupted. in otherwords, the language they brought was significantly altered. This naturally happens with language. The Tower of Babel is a prime example of rapid language changes.”
Uhhh, what large body of water was present at the Tower of Babel. You are all over the map. This is why Mormons are laughed at as morons. You show yourself perfectly ignorant on language and how it works, how it changes, how it transmits a culture. This is also why you don’t understand the idiocy of Mormon history as recorded in the BoM. There is no archeological connection with Israel, so you go to Egypt to bail yourself out, because Egypt used pictures/glyphs as their writing. Israel did not, but no matter, make the connection via Egypt..Kuckoo…Kuckoo…Kuckoo!
Again, there is no archeological, no linguistic and no DNA substantiation of Israelites existing in the Americas. Indeed, all of these show the contrary. Hey, but go to Egypt. Maybe you can find a Christian cross in the Egyptian Ankh. Hey, and because we find a cross in Mayan ruins, that must mean Mayans were Egyptians. Ergo, Israelites came to America. Good
Report Post »gordonknapp
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 7:35pmJesus warned to ‘beware of false prophets coming in my name’. Wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 7:54pmLuke611;
“But in the New World, examples of writing on metal plates are only now beginning to emerge. Part of the reason is that archaeology in America has been important only since the turn of the century. Since less study has been applied, less is known about the languages of the pre-Columbian Indian. Also, fewer artifacts have been unearthed than in the richly storied lands of Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean, for example. However, as early as 1851, Mariano Eduardo de Rivero, director of Lima’s National Museum, and his associate, Juan Diego de Tschudi, asserted that there were two kinds of ancient Peruvian writing: “The one and surely the most ancient consisted of certain hieroglyphic characters; the other of knots made with strings of various colors. The hieroglyphs, very different from the Mexican ones, were sculpted in stone or engraved in metal.” (Antiquidades Peruanas, Vienna: Imprenta Imperial de la Corte y del Estado, 1851, vol. 5, p. 101.) ”
Looks like you’re right about metal plates being unearthed in Central America. That was written in 1979. It‘s nice shen wcience catches up to God’s truth. ;>)
http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=a16e615b01a6b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 8:01pm“Again, there is … no DNA substantiation of Israelites existing in the Americas.”
Incorrect. For your reading pleasure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA)
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 8:33pm@FREEDOMPURVEYOR, and to any who truly have ears to hear, listen to the accurate presentation on Haplogroup X, and its supposed connection to Native Americans and Israelites. Interestingly, this is presented by a Mormon who knows the truth. Don’t be fooled by faux Mormon scientists who spin the data to suit the Book of Mormon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoAbbz7bjnc
Report Post »LDSmommy
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 8:46pmTo “MY FAITH”,
Report Post »I am honestly shocked at both of your comments, about Mormons being “racist because they didn’t allow blacks” for a time, and about Catholics, because “they molest children”. What all encompassing BS! I’m Mormon and certainly not racist. I‘m sure there’s PLENTY of Catholics here that can tell you they don’t molest children! I wonder what church you attend and if they have ever made a mistake or changed it’s policies? Do you hold all of the members, including yourself, accountable for those mistakes?
Others, I can’t even believe some people are saying “Oh, you have to accept Jesus to be Christian…” Uh, hello? The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints. Christian=Christ/believing in Christ, which we most certainly do.
You are the reason why people think all Christian’s are bigots. You ARE bigots. The LDS Church gives back so much, our staff is all volunteer, we are self-sufficient and have incredible personal responsibility. OH, and our “scriptures” (as someone said we use rather than the Bible) INCLUDE the Bible, geez! Above all of this, we KNOW Jesus died for our sins.
Must be nice to see the world from such a high horse. As for me, I’ll let my Heavenly Father be the judge. Something tells me y‘all aren’t qualified.
WSGAC
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 8:58pmLDSMOMMY said, “You ARE bigots. The LDS Church gives back so much, our staff is all volunteer, we are self-sufficient and have incredible personal responsibility. OH, and our ‘scriptures’ (as someone said we use rather than the Bible) INCLUDE the Bible, geez! Above all of this, we KNOW Jesus died for our sins.”
The devil also knows that Jesus died for your sins. So what! And he believes in God too!
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:17pmWSGAC;
While Luke611 is quite capable for speaking for himself I think his only goal was to show artifiacts which correlate with the story ofthe Book of Mormon. I don’t think he was trying to pinpoint where the Nephites were. You asked for an artifact and he showed you one. More than one in fact.
“I could easily produce cross shaped images from Egyptian glyphs, and see a baptismal font in the same.”
Doesn’t that indicate that their religious practices were influenced by the Hebrews?
“If Nephi and Laman passed down the true faith to their children, then the language they used was the language of their origin – Hebrew”
And it was corrupted, don’t you know? You continue your diatribe as if you are omniscient in history. Such foolishness. You keep rendering unto God that which is Ceasars. That’s greater foolishness.
“Funny thing, we have nothing that looks or sounds close to Hebrew anywhere in the Americas.”
Not funny at all. Mormon 9:32-33 speaks of Reformed Egyptian and of Hebrew not being preserved by the Nephites. In other words, the book of mormon says it was not preserved in Hebrew for over time Hebrew was altered.
Heres a good link which discusses some criticisms against Joseph Smith for claiming he found records on gold plates.
http://www.mormonfortress.com/boxmetal.html
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:23pmWSGAC;
“Uhhh, what large body of water was present at the Tower of Babel. You are all over the map. This is why Mormons are laughed at as morons. ”
LOL. When did I say a large body of water was present at the Tower of Babel? I didn’t. I said if you divided the Hebrew-speaking groups you used asan example of Hebrew changing such as thewritings in the Masoretic texts and those found in the Qumran Cave by a large body of water, such as the atlantic Ocean, then these two groups would end up speaking two different languages in no time. Then I used the Tower of Babel as an example of rapid linguistic change. Perhaps I could have separated the Tower of Babel but nonetheless, you’re the one to misinterpret wha I said.
Is the Tower of Babel an example of rapid linguistic change or not?
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:49pmDarren ….thank you for the link!!!
de Rivero book was translated into English much earlier than 1979, he actually was Ambassdor in Europe for Peru and had been there sevral years leading to his death. However you just introduced me to a Altun Ha in Belize, an archeo-dig I had heard of before but escaped my memory. I have been trying to remember that area for two years to research the value it has for my work….and it’s been on LDS.org all the while. That is so appreciated
My interest is strictly mesoamerica.
Report Post »cozmo
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:52pmfirst off read romans 10: 9-13. “that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth lord jesus and shalt believe in thine heart that God hat raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved….”(just read the rest of the verses and then continue with reading my post.) so to say Mormons aren’t christian is to judge their hearts but that is impossible and wrong according to God, who alone shall be able to judge hearts. woe be it to the people that try to judge others where only God should judge
Report Post »valettie
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:57pmMormons are not true Christians, because they have added books in their bibles, the Lord honors the Word as it was written, it was never meant t b watered down, or added to, or taken from, n warns of judgments if that is done. I’d rather vote for Michelle Bachman personally based on her principles but Jesus taught the world is the devils, n in his control n HE gives control or shares it with whom he will, he offered the Kingdoms of the World to Jesus if he would fall down n worship him, but of course Jesus refused, cuz he knew who he was n what he has/had with God.
Report Post »So she would be working against her boss sort of speaking. But she would be for the wealth of the People, and it’d help the people for awhile in her presidency. SO this said, know things will not go the ways Christians want at least not for long, even the bible teaches about the end time, now, what’s coming. Sometime it will totally turn on all Christians.
Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 10:35pmDarren…..
BTW, Before my conversion, I was So Baptist attended First Bap Dallas, Tex when WA Criswell was pastor. During that time I was highly involved in Anti-LDS; the Dallas temp was announced and ground-breaking and no way I was going to set idly by and allow that. I was associated with Walter Martin and even Ed Decker.
I read every post concerning this campaign, every post in the blog of each story. I have been impressed with your points of reply to the absurdity of the anti-mormon comments.
These individuals that login to blog with an agenda other than the spirit for which the BLAZE concept initiated, such as WSGAC and Islefordian, whom persist to inflict their limited skilset for debate. They exhibit excessive contention of yours or any statement in the positive seemingly in contrast of thier viewpoint indicative of someone who is overtly or subtly arrogant, exhibitionistic, vain, manipulative, and greedy for admiration. They have demonstrated character assassination and projection; some of the overt ways in which the narcissist expresses himself. it is recognized that narcissists prize intellectual performance above almost everything else for you to challenge them with qualified debate evoke a hostile affect do upward comparison that detracts from their self -glorification.
Anti-LDS violently oppose debate, thus most are greatly narcissistic. The individuals with the once in a blue moon one-line comments. they are those who seek truth.
(CONT)
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:05pm(cont) DARREN
I’ve wasted about three hours of my life in these blogs repling to the most uninformed, illogical and unreasonable comments from those who’s profile I once immulated. …i was developing the traits of narcissim THEY presently demonstrate, culture and embrace. One day in 7th grade our teacher was discussing the story of Montezuma woshipping Cortes as the great white God….I asked why would an Indian worship a white God. teacher replied I dont know. Many years later I found the answer from Christ in America that my church was mocking one day. That changed my life. They had all had Texas history and heard the same story, but were blind to what God was telling them.
Report Post »Just as WSGAC and ISLEFORDIAN. Quit wasting time arguing with idiots. YOUR time is valuable to God. These people wish to reside in ignorance, few wish to allow the process of truth to progress. These individuals that blog their agenda on the BLAZE are most assuredly afflicted by the lack of contribution they have made in life presently, and lack initiaitve and sacrifice to advance their privilages of freedom,…so they will always attack others who have a created for themself what they have always sought: a life
You and I debate with intellect and respect, they refuse and thus they are the mental invalids of Satan,…I should know, I was once as they many years ago.
There is a reason why the National Council of Churches has declared LDS the fastest growing church worldwide: Anti-LDS
MrConstitution
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:29pmMormon is a nick name taken from the Book of Mormon. The name of the church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”. The Book of Mormon is a companion to the Bible. It is Another Testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon and the Bible are the fulfillment of Ezekiel 37:15-17. Verse 16 from the king James version reads “Moreover, thou son of man, take the one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: 17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.” Judah (Jews) produced the Bible. Judah had a brother as the bible tells us by the name of Joseph and one of his sons was Ephraim. Joseph Smith descended from Joseph and Ephraim. I have read and studied both the Bible and Book of Mormon and they both testify that Jesus is the Christ and that no one can be saved but through His merits.” We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Read the Book of Mormon for yourself. Find out for yourself. It is either of God or the Devil. I know it is of God, it is a second witness of Jesus Christ.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:32pm“Interestingly, this is presented by a Mormon who knows the truth.”
That video exhibits extremely flawed logic. His analysis is based on the assumption that native Americans are supposed to be derived from people of Israel, which is not the case. Obviously native Americans are more closely related to people in Siberia, because that is where the vast majority of them came from. The introduction of a very, very small amount of blood from Israel is not going to change that.
I would point out that scientists like to shape their findings into what they “think” should be the case. Scientists come up with a theory, then they endeavor to prove it. Regardless of their findings, they try their best to mold them to fit the original theory.
Report Post »MadisonianRombot
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:51pmVALETTIE
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 9:57pm
“Mormons are not true Christians, because they have added books in their bibles”
Valettie I think you are confusing the word Christian -Which means someone who believes Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah and Savior of the World(This is what “mormons” believe). With the word NoCanHaveMoreScripturesThanTheBibleians.
By the way the Book of Mormon is not an “addition” to the Bible
:)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:55pmWSGAC;
“The devil also knows that Jesus died for your sins. So what! And he believes in God too!”
I’d add to that and say that the devil scientifically believes in God. He knows God’s power first-hand, thus experienced it. He most definitely does not believe in God in any spiritual sense, only oin the metaphysical science that God is powerful and that god is correct. Science, is all on the devil’s side for it proves he is right. ;>)
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:58pm“Mormons are not true Christians, because they have added books in their bibles, the Lord honors the Word as it was written, it was never meant t b watered down”
Interesting position. Was the New Testament not added to the Old Testament?
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:13amLuke611;
If you’re still in Dallas, I’ll let you know that I live in Houston. Although it may never happen I would greatly enjoy meeting you. I appreciate your conversion story. I find that yours is a story of listening ot that “still small voice”. It truly baffles me that when “true Christians” come on to The Blaze to bash Da’ Mormonz, they constantly refrain from one aspect of the gospel of Jesus Christ. That is the Holy Ghost. WSGAC’s psots area prime example of this neglegence. He wants scientific proof ofthe veracity f the Book of mormon. He cited scientific proof of the Bible (not entirely correct but it does have merit). So, where’s the Holy Ghost in all this? Isn’t it by the power ofthe Hoyl Ghost tha one knows, truly knows that the Bible is true? Isn’t it by the power of the Holy Ghost that one knows Jesus died for our sins and was resurrected the third dya? Isn’t it the power of the Holy Ghost which sanctifies us, uplifts us and empowers us with faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the very true God of Isreal? WSCAG, Islefordian and the rest all condemn the LDS faith for rejecting the Holy Trinity. Well, aren‘t they rejecting it’s power by ignoring it? And ifthe Holy Ghost is God, then they are also rejecting the Father and the Son (well, same in LDS theology but that these are separate physical beings). Yet they purport to be the “true Christians”. Weird.
God speed, sir.
Report Post »HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:15am@WSGAC,
Report Post »Of course I haven’t convinced you, you’re immune to sound logic. I only engage you so as not to let yours be the only voice, and in case there are neutral parties judging the debate. You’ve missed my salient points, and only made logically fallacious arguments in defense of your own.
Archaeology has not proven the Bible to be true, and makes no claim to verify its content.
You claim there SHOULD be evidence for a Nephite civilization, fine. There IS evidence, you just don’t accept any of it. The BoM claims there were large civilizations on the Americas. There were. The BoM also predicts almost complete erasure of Nephite culture by Lamanites (this is consistent with many cultures, Egypt being a prime example, where new dynasties erased/destroyed records from older ones). Just because you want me to specify that X city was Y Nephite city, and then laugh at me when I won‘t doesn’t refute the core claims of the book. Your cry of “fraud” is hollow even BEFORE we discuss the actual doctrinal contents (which you haven’t laid a finger on, curiously, in this thread)
But enough of attempting to correct your faulty logic. I’m not an archaeologist, I just reason well. I DO, however, hold an MA in linguistics, and will spend my next post detailing your ignorance and error on matters of language.
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:38am@WSGAC
Report Post »1. The BoM claims Nephites spoke Hebrew at first (which morphed over 1k+ years), but that to save plate space, was written in a hieroglyphic script (where characters represent ideas, not words) rather than an alphabetic one (where characters represent sounds to mimic oral form of language). We call it “Reformed Egyptian”. Only the first prophet was fluent in both languages (Egyptian of the day, and Hebrew of the day) and could write in both without special training. Every other prophet there had to learn the Reformed Egyptian as a kind of code foreign to their own writing/language system. Since the record was passed down from prophet to prophet, this fully explains how traces of Egyptian-style hieroglyphics could be completely lacking from the New World archaeological record.
2. You are correct to wonder about traces of Hebrew, then, but so completely lacking understanding of how languages live, change, and die that you’re stuck insisting non sequiturs and comparing apples to oranges from beginning to end.
a. There ARE traces of Hebrew in at least one American language: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxrllcMkqS4 (but I suspect you’ve lied, and are NOT satisfied with the evidence as you claimed).
b. (in next post)
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:53am@WSGAC
Report Post »2. (On Hebrew)
b. Both Latin and Hebrew are resurrected languages. At some point, there existed no native speakers of either language. Because writings were abundant and the structure of the language was evident, educated guesses were made about pronunciation and interested parties kept alive some semblance of the original in spoken form as a second language. Until there was political interest in reestablishing a Jewish state, no native speakers of Modern Hebrew existed. Backtracing a “proto-” language from what we know of its sisters is a trick historical linguists have had great success with for Latin’s precursor (Indo-European), but very few others. Why? Because very few others have so many sister languages coded in written form. And when there’s no writing system to speak of (BoM claims Nephites were wiped out, and Lamanites devolved in paganism to the writing-less state Columbus met Amerindians in) within just a few generations a complete new dialect can evolve. Over the time periods the BoM claims to cover it is PERFECTLY plausible that by now the puzzle has become irretrievably muddled. One would have to establish a proto-language of a proto-language several times over with no written clues. No linguist would attempt it because too many educated guesses would make the result unreliable.
Furthermore, we DON’T have the original NT manuscripts as you claim. NOT an LDS site: http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html
Ded-Bred
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 1:32amLDS(Latter Day Saints, or Mormons doctrine is that God(Heavenly Father) promises that through faith we
Report Post »shall be blessed with the FULNESS of His kingdom. Mormons believe(& teach) this passage means that their wives & themselves shall be given an earth like this one. The married couple shall be gods to their own “earth” , the children in this new world will get this same deal if they can be ‘good’. Joel Osteen is incorrect.
Their doctrine isn’t merely unbiblical, it’s in the same class as scientology.
Truth is and always will be controversial and confrontational, which is why most Christians prefer their Jesus to be watered down: He never said following Him would be easy. We all want to be liked. But we must be God pleasers.
Now, that being said, why would someone tell me who to vote for? There is a Muslim in the White House who has less moral s than a pedophile burning an orphanage down and less backbone than a jellyfish. But who I vote for is my business, & shame on them!!!
WSGAC
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 8:44amDED BRED, There is no talking with these nutjobs. Their use of the word *faith* is really nothing more than pietistic credulity. The Holy Spirit confirms their credulity with warm feelings and such. So truth is confirmed by warm feelings. I’ve had numerous of their ilk come to my front door trying to convert me with their request that I read and pray…that the Holy Spirit would confirm the truth of the BoM with a warm feeling inside. So I did, back when I was 15. No warm feelings, but they kept coming. It wasn’t until later, when I attended college and learned to spell, unlike the Mr. smarty pants LUKE611, that historical investigation of this nonsense exposed it for what it was, a lie! Even the personal character of Joseph Smith underscored the lie. Yet, they still believe, even when nothing confirms it. Heavy manipulation of the Yucatan ruins only shows their bent – believe at all costs…even bend the truth heavily to conform to the lie.
I am convinced the Book of Mormon should be renamed, The Book for Morons.
Beware the baloney from Moroni, for moron is in his name!
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 9:25am“that historical investigation of this nonsense exposed it for what it was, a lie!”
One again, lack of evidence is not proof of absence. We know so little about the history of pre-Columbus America, and yet you have determined that you have it all figured out. You expect that native Americans should be speaking Hebrew, and that ancient Jewish artifacts should be scattered about like arrowheads. You seem to believe that the Book of Mormon suggests that all native Americans are descended from Lehi, which could not be further from the truth.
It is these foolish assumptions which lead you to stubbornly believe that the Book of Mormon can be “proven” false.
2 Nephi 29
6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a BIble, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a BIble save it were by the Jews?
7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath, and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?
Report Post »Gates
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:50pmAfter all is said and done, Mormons believe “god” was once a man as we are men and that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers. You do Not need to go further to classify them as a cult!
Report Post »hargisP
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 1:16pmThe Mormon’s believe that Jesus was the brother of Satan. They don’t believe He is God. Big difference. That is why they are considered a Cult. You have to believe in the right Jesus, who is God. You might just have the wrong one, such as Jesus from Mexico, he can’t save you.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 1:26pmFREEDOMPURVEYOR said, “One again, lack of evidence is not proof of absence.”
Then I suppose it would be ok to believe in fairies, goblins, gremlins, and flying pink elephants, cuz even though there is lack of evidence, that is no proof of absence.
In the end FP, clever mantras don’t deliver you from your idiocy, cuz in the end you have a faith that believes in anything it wants to believe in, calling it legitimate cuz the name Israel has been co-opted for such purposes. And if that’s the case, then could you morons please explain what the difference is between your god and an imaginary god?
I know, I know, warm feelings….right? What a joke!
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 1:40pm“And if that’s the case, then could you morons please explain what the difference is between your god and an imaginary god?”
Good question. This is the logical barrier that atheists cannot breach, because they have no concept of spirituality.
“The Mormon’s believe that Jesus was the brother of Satan. They don’t believe He is God. Big difference. That is why they are considered a Cult.”
A cult is not a religion which has stances that you do not agree with, sorry. Mormons believe that all children of God are brothers and sisters, and yes, that Jesus is actually God’s only begotten son… like it says in the Bible.
Report Post »FreedomPurveyor
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 1:42pm“After all is said and done, Mormons believe “god” was once a man”
That is not a part of official LDS doctrine, sorry. A lot of you who spread anti-Mormon misnomers would do well to actually read the Book of Mormon instead of making up its contents, or believing whatever another anti-Mormon tells you.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 2:15pm“After all is said and done, Mormons believe “god” was once a man”
FREEDOMPURVEYOR REPLIES: “That is not a part of official LDS doctrine, sorry. A lot of you who spread anti-Mormon misnomers would do well to actually read the Book of Mormon instead of making up its contents, or believing whatever another anti-Mormon tells you.”
So when the prophet Joseph Smith teaches about the revelation given to him, the LDS church should not take his words as doctrine? What then is a prophet, and what determines doctrine?
Here are the words of the prophet himself on the matter:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted Man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens. That is the great secret… It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God and to know…that he was once a man like us. Here, then, is eternal life–to know that only wise and true God, and you have got to learn how to become Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you. .. God himself, the father of us all dwelt on an earth the same as Jesus Christ.”
- The Prophet Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 342-345, and also quoted heavily by the church, see Gospel Principles, Chapter 47.
This has been the teaching of the LDS church since 1844, quoted frequently throughout its history. These are the words of their own prophet. So then tell us FP, when did the church cease teaching this as d
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 2:25pmAnd how about Ol’ Brigham Young…what did this great prophet teach of God being a man?
“What, is it possible that the Father of Heights, the Father of our spirits, could reduce himself and come forth like a man? Yes, he was once a man like you and I are and was once on an earth like this, passed through the ordeal you and I pass through. He had his father and his mother and he has been exalted through his faithfulness, and he is become Lord of all. He is the God pertaining to this earth. He is our Father. He begot our spirits in the spirit world. They have come forth and our earthly parents have organized tabernacles for our spirits and here we are today. That is the way we came.”
- Prophet Brigham Young, 14 July 1861, Recorded in “The Essential Brigham Young”, p.138
Not a doctrine of the LDS church? Was Mr. Young then simply navel gazing, and talking off the top of his head? The LDS church of yesteryear didn’t think so, as they believed him and taught others what he had taught them.
If this is not a doctrine of the church, then what constitutes doctrine if not the prophet himself?
Very strange those Mormons!
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:17pmWSGAC;
“The Holy Spirit confirms their credulity with warm feelings and such. So truth is confirmed by warm feelings. ”
Here comes the true Christian to blatantly deny the role ofthe Holy Spirit. It seems to me that the third person of the Holy Trinity has no role in your life for spirituality. You render unto God that which is Ceasar’s.
Quaint.
“Beware the baloney from Moroni”
You should make a rap song. In fact, keep showing those rhymes and I just may convert to your thinking. Perhaps you and I can make an appearance on Seasame Street.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:22pmHargisp;
“They don’t believe He is God.”
Mormons don’t believe Jesus was God? When Jesus descended from heaven to be among the Nephite He said:
“14 Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.”
(3 nephi)
Being called “God of Isreal” and the “God of the whole earth” sounds like being God to me.
How about you?
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:30pmWSGAC;
“clever mantras don’t deliver you from your idiocy”
Whoohoo, mormons are nor promoted to beholding to “idiocy”. So now we LDS are morons ANd idiots. I feel a rap song coming on:
“Beware of the baloney,
from Moroni.
We eat macaroni,
while playing the saxaophoney”
“Heyyyyy, hoooooo,
heyyyyy, hoooooo”
“Mormons are morons,
and now idiots too.
They trust the Holy Spirit,
but I trust science so I‘m no foo’ ”
“Heyyyyy, hoooooo,
heyyyyy, hoooooo”
“Come on, give it up ya’ll.
I say ,heyyyyy, hoooooo.
we say heyyyyy, hooooo”
There’s a future great career for you on Seasame Street, WSGAC.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:31pmWSGAC;
“then could you morons please explain what the difference is between your god and an imaginary god? ”
Our God is Elohim. His Son is YHWH. Who’s your God?
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:45pmWSGAC;
“So when the prophet Joseph Smith teaches about the revelation given to him, the LDS church should not take his words as doctrine? What then is a prophet, and what determines doctrine?”
That;s actually a good question. “Doctrine” literally means “teaching”. Therefore anything “taught” is “doctrine”. What I’m careful to do is to distiguish unofficial doctrines of the LDS faith which I call “ideas” and official doctrine which I call “official doctrine”. For a teaching to become official doctrine of the LDS Churhch, teachings must go through a process. 1) It must be presented before the entire First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. At this point, a sustaining a unaminous votee for the teaching presented. These two groups are typically 15 individuals so any sustaining vote shy of that number will stop the teaching dead in its tracks from becoming official LDS doctrine. 2) After this first step, the teaching must be presented before the general Priesthood leadership ofthe LDS church. 3) From there the teaching must be presented before the entire general membership ofthe LDS Church for a sustaining vote. What I really like about this process is that it allows not only LDS leaders but its entire populace to seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit to sustain God’s revelation to them. We are all God’s children and thus god will speak to us ivdinivually to confirm the truth of His word and will. (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:51pm(con’t);
The first citation you gave regarding the LDS taching that God the Father was once a man like us soundsl ike it‘s from the King Follett’s Report. I already addressed that earlier in that such words were recorded third party and altered over time. It’s impossible to determine who altered it and how. It is not a reliable source of history and it is not official doctrine. By the way, the idea is fine with me but it is not part of my faith, nor worship. In the LDS faith and worship, God the Father was there “in the beginnnig”, just like mainstream Christianity teaches and believes.
So, in light of this, who wrote “The Essential Brigham young”? What was the exact source? Did Brigham Young approve of it? Adn it’s not official doctrine. It therefore would only be Brigham Young’s own idea.
Report Post »WSGAC
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 4:51pmDARREN, I noticed you didn’t address the crux of my question to FP. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young both taught: “What, is it possible that the Father of Heights, the Father of our spirits, could reduce himself and come forth like a man? Yes, he was once a man like you and I are and was once on an earth like this, passed through the ordeal you and I pass through. He had his father and his mother and he has been exalted through his faithfulness, and he is become Lord of all. He is the God pertaining to this earth. He is our Father. He begot our spirits in the spirit world. They have come forth and our earthly parents have organized tabernacles for our spirits and here we are today. That is the way we came.
- Prophet Brigham Young, 14 July 1861, Recorded in “The Essential Brigham Young”, p.138
Indeed, this has been the official teaching until when? When did this cease being church doctrine? When the council of 12 changed it’s mind on what was clearly taught from the beginning? Is your LDS church “progressive” when it comes to doctrinal teachings?
Makes me wonder how Ol’ Glenn Beck would answer this as well.
Report Post »Bearfoot
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 7:41pmDarren, – “Our God is Elohim. His Son is YHWH. Who’s your God?”
I have to inject myself in here. The Bible tells us differently.
King James Version (KJV)
Exodus 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.
Isaiah 26:4 Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:
Psalms 83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.
The four Hebrew letters YHWH is called the “tetragrammaton” which represents Almighty God’s Name, Jehovah or Yahweh.
Report Post »Jesus, the Anointed Christ, is the Son of God and is not YHWH. Do not insult the Father or the Son by saying they are the same personages.
Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 1:35amWSGAC;
“I noticed you didn’t address the crux of my question to FP. Joseph Smith, Brigham Young both taught: ”
i did? i thought I said, “So, in light of this, who wrote “The Essential Brigham young”? What was the exact source? Did Brigham Young approve of it? Adn it’s not official doctrine. It therefore would only be Brigham Young’s own idea.” Wait, let me check…oh, yeah, that is what I wrote. That’s as much as I know about the source as I can comment on. And, no, it was NEVER official doctrine, and yes, assuming the source is accurate (rt probably isn’t but I could be wrong) it would only be Brigham Young’s idea, not an official belief ogf the LDS Church. prophets are also mortal men no different than you and I. They are, therefore, subjet to mortal limitations just like you and I. And do you really think that all the prophets ofthe bible every said and thought are what we have recorded today? People painstankenly set forth to decipher what should be canon and what should not be. Christians today for some reason thaink that when one is a prophet, they are infallible. Nonesense. Only Jesus was infallible.
(con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 1:37am(con’t);
“Indeed, this has been the official teaching until when?” It never was official teaching.
“When the council of 12 changed it’s mind on what was clearly taught from the beginning?” They never did. They never accepted what you say Joseph Smith taught.
“Is your LDS church “progressive” when it comes to doctrinal teachings?” I guess. It has an open canon for doctrine.
“Makes me wonder how Ol’ Glenn Beck would answer this as well.” I‘m sure he’s 100% fine with that.
now, tell me about how God became like a mortal man and then exalted to heaven. Don‘t forget I’m talking about Jesus. I love that story. Especially this time of the year.
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 1:53amBearfoot;
Hello my friend. I hope all is treating you and all others here well. I apreciate your input and here’s my response.
“Do not insult the Father or the Son by saying they are the same personages.”
I absolutely do not say, nor believe that the Father and the Son are the same personage. In fact in a prevous post I made to WSGAC 0n Dec 23 starting @ 4:03 PM I made quite clear that it was scriptural corruption which made Elohim and YHWH one and the same personage. I very much believe that they are not but here’s where we differ. I very much believe that Elohim is God the Father and that YHWH (Jehovah) is the Son. Yes, YHWH was the God who appeared before man and who is God above all the earth. in fact, in a response I made on Dec 24 @ 4:22 PM to a certain Harpisp who said that the LDS do not believe Jesus is God I cited 3 nephi 11:14 which Jesus declared Himself the ‘God of Isreal, and the God fthe whole earth’. The LDS very much believe that Jesus is God , the Very God of Isreal. It was He who appeared “as an angel” to Abraham, Moses, Jacob, and all others who had such a blessed theophany. But who is Elohim in LDS theology? I once again, as I did with WSGAC, will direct you to the works of margaret Barket, who I have found to explain this far better than any other scholar I can think of. Her works of tthe First Temple worship in ancient Palestine are remarkable and revealing. (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 2:13am(con’t);
Although Barker appears to be trinitarian (you and I are not) her works are so revealing and in many ways delightful to the LDS. The following is a link to one of Barker’s works called, “The Second Person”. http://www.theway.org.uk/back/431Barker.pdf I’ll give you parts of it here related to the topic on hand as to who is Elohim (and YHWH).
“Texts in Second Isaiah, who lived shortly after the changes in Jeusalem introduced by King Josiah at the end of the seventh century BCE (2 Kings 23), show that both the name and the theology were changing. Belief in God Most high and in His Son YHWH were being replaced with the monotheism that we now regard as familiar. Barker then argues that there were conflicting interpretations beteewn the Masoretic text (which the King James Version of the Bible relies upon and which most English texts rely upon) and the Septuagint. Mush resolution to these conflicts of interpretation, Barker argues came with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls of the Qumran Cave. Specifically, these texts give a slightly different word alteration to Deuteronomy 32:8. Despite the slight word alteraton, the implications are immense. In today’s texts (from the Masoretic interpretation) we read:
” 8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.” (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 2:31am(con’t);
With the discovery of the scrolls in the Qumran Cave, we find, as Barker points out, the words, ‘according tothe numbers of the sons of God’ in place of ‘according to the number of the sons of Isreal’ which we have today. This is very significant since in verse nine of the same chapter we read:
“9 For the Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”
So, we read that the ‘most High God’ divided unto the nations their inheritence. The ‘LORD’s portion’ was Jacob (Isreal). Who is “LORD” and who is “God Most High”?
Barker continues to make the connection. As you well know, “LORD” (Adonai in the Hebrew) replaces “YHWH” in the majority of the Old Testament English texts though I’m well aware that your Biblical text replaces it back to YHWH. But ‘LORD“ is directly related to ” YHWH”. Who is “LORD” inthe New Testament? When people came to the place where Jesus wwas entombed, they found an angel there who said:
” 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.” (Mathew 28)
Here Christ is called “LORD” (YHWH) by and “angel of the LORD”. Also we can read from another angelic manifestation (appropriate for this time of year’s celebration):
“11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2)
Again, Jesus is “LORD” or “YHWH”. (con’t)
Report Post »Darren
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 3:02am(con’t);
When Thomas beheld the resurrected Jesus he said, “my LORD and my God”. Jesus is thus clearly YHWH in the New Testament.
Now, return to Deuteronomy 8. the ‘most High God’ sent for an inheretance to the ‘sons of God’ and one of which was YHWH. YHWH, being Jesus, was Son of the most High even in the Old Tesatment. A movement to usher in strict monotheism combined Elohim and YHWH as one and the same God (personages). Both you and I know that the Father and the Son are not the same personages though I believe that Jesus was YHWH, the true God of Isreal. So, what of Elohim? YHWH was son of the ‘most High’ and so who is this ‘most High’? According tothe Qumran scrolls, the Deuteronomy passage which says, ‘according otteh smns of God’, “God” is translated as “Elohim”. Thus YHWH was the Son of Elohim.
Barkers works constantly connect Elohim, God Most High, of the old Testament as the God the Father in the New Testament and YHWH (Jehovah), Son of Elohim, God Most High, of the Old Testament as Jesus Christ, Son of the Father, in the New Testament.
Report Post »Bearfoot
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 10:50amDarren,
Thank you for your lengthy response but on this, you and I are very far apart.
You see, I hold to the 66 books of the Holy Scriptures, my trust is in God’s Word the Bible, and as a consequence, have no confidence in, or acceptance of, the Book of Mormon or a Mormon philosophy.
Thanks again for your work in providing your response and may we have peace. – Romans 12:17-18
Report Post »MemphisViking
Posted on December 25, 2011 at 12:39pm“Reminder that this word trinity is unmentioned in the Bible.” The word airplane is also unmentioned in the Bible. Doesn’t make them not real.
Report Post »SaraD
Posted on December 29, 2011 at 7:48amHe should be asked why he was a member of a religon that believed black people did not have souls, and could not be leaders in their religon, as the sons of Cain. He was a member of the mormon church in his 30s when this was finally overturned by the law.
Report Post »Here’s the other thing. Mormons believe a convicted con man found a golden bible, that he couldn‘t show anyone in the 1800’s that was written in 17th century english. They think Eden was somewhere around Michagan. They believe people were not created by God and if you are a good mormon you get your own planet when you die. Not just 72 virgins, your own planet. Let‘s not pretend the magic underwear bit isn’t nuts.
Phoneguy
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:57pmThe easiest thing the identify on Earth is a person who has never read the Book of Mormon.
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:20pmI’ll bite. How do you tell?
Report Post »Reader1234
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:01pmEasy, when someone says that the Book of Mormon doesn’t say or have anything to do with Christ. The whole book is full of Christ. I invite you to read it, not to try and convert to the LDS faith, but to see if I am right.
Report Post »kaydeebeau
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:20pmI didn’t make it through the whole book, did get through several chapters / books (not sure what the correct description is of the divisions). I didn’t find any mention of Jesus, His mission or His teachings. Perhaps that came later in the last 1/2 I didn’t read. That being said, if anyone believes that Jesus is the Risen Son of God, who came to earth in the form of a man to be the supreme blood sacrifice for the remission of our sins – to pay the penalty for the sins that I could never pay and follows Him, then I am supposed to cal him my brother in Christ. There is but one Shepherd and one Flock – http://www.maxlucado.com/articles/topical/life_aboard_the_fellow-ship
Report Post »jcannon98188
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:47pmThe Book of Mormon teaches of Christ in 3rd Nephi, which is when he arrives to the people there following his crucifixion. Before that they do not talk about Jesus the man, but of his word, and his command. It preaches of his doctrine, but not of himself physically, because the first 2/3rds of the Book of Mormon were written before the birth of Christ. But again, all throughout the book they teach of Gods commandments, and his (Jesus) example.
Report Post »PGMike
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:50pm@kaydeebeau,
Report Post »You need to read it again and pay attention this time. The Book of Mormon is filled with the mention and teachings of Christ from the opening pages to the closing versus. It is almost impossible to read the Book of Mormon for even 30 minutes and not find multiple references to Christ and His doctrine.
Doctor Nordo
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:30pm@KAYDEEBEAU
Well, respectfully, it seems you weren’t paying very much attention when you were reading it.
1 Nephi 11:13-21 (this is on page 20 in the Book of Mormon)
13 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the great city of Jeruselum, and also other cities. And I beheld the city of Nazareth; and in the city of Nazareth I beheld a virgin, and she was exceedingly fair and white.
14 And it came to pass that I saw the heavens open; and an angel came down and stood before me; and he said unto me: Nephi, what beholdest thou?
15 And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins.
16 And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?
17 And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.
18 And he said unto me: Behold the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.
19 And it came to pass that I beheld that she was carried away in the Spirit; and after she had been carried away in the Spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!
20 And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms.
21 And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yes, even the Son of the Eternal Father!
And that’s on page 20! There are many more times in the book where Christ is mentioned by name, especially in the latter half when he goes to fulfill Jon 10:16/
Report Post »rush_is_right
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:51pm“You need to read it again and pay attention this time. The Book of Mormon is filled with the mention and teachings of ”
yeah the quran mentions jesus too….so? the mormon jesus is a created being…not the eternal everlasting God….
the mormons have multiple gods..the God of the bible is one.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 10:04pm@RUSH_IS_RIGHT
The difference is that the Quran says nothing of the divinity of Jesus, nor of his central position in our faith. The Book of Mormon, on the other hand, does nothing BUT proclaim the divinity of Christ. He is the keystone of all of our beliefs. In the Quran he is nothing but a prophet. In the BoM, he is the Son of God, the messiah, the redeemer of the world, and the lifeblood of our souls.
Report Post »kaydeebeau
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 10:19pmMy point is not denominational.. There is but one Flock and one Sheperd – one Body of Christ – One Church – in the grand scheme of things the tie that binds – the path to salvation – Jesus (As illustrated in Mark 9) – we as the Body of believers have got to stop the denominational infighting – If someone preaches that the only way to salvation is thru the shed blood of Jesus – I can disagree with the denominational details – I am still to call you my blood brother (bought and adopted by Christ’s blood). I am a Baptist – though the Copts (thought to be the actualy first church founded by Mark) or the Catholics founded by Peter or any of the other denominations whose foundings are credited to other disciples – they all knew Jesus personally on this earth – the practices are not nearly as important as the underlying foundation that though the blood of Jesus – the way, the truth and the life is the only way to salvation. the important principle is Jesus – everything else is chafe – the attempt by the evil one to divide the Body of Christ’s Church
Report Post »Patrick Henry II
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:43pmWe studied it about 5 years ago at church. It was amazingly different from Christianity. I especially like the book of Moses(?) with the hyroglyphics translated by Some founding Mormon. Interesting translation it was; wrong but interesting. Later the Rosetta stone was discovered and correct translations following blew that book out of the water.
Report Post »I really do like most Mormons I meet and enjoy fighting along side of you politically.
Doctor Nordo
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:46pm@Patrick
Yes, I’m sure your church did a very unbiased study as well.
Report Post »Chuck Stein
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:50am@ Patrick Henry II:
Report Post »“hyroglyphics translated by Some founding Mormon. Interesting translation it was; wrong but interesting. Later the Rosetta stone was discovered and correct translations following blew that book out of the water.” Very interesting. Especially since the Rosetta Stone was discovered by Napoleon’s troops in Egypt in 1799 (before Joseph Smith, Jr. was even born).
HappyStretchedThin
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 3:02am@ Chuck,
Report Post »Patrick Henry is technically correct about one thing: Napoleon’s troops found the stone, but the code didn’t get cracked until well after JS. Where his pastor led him astray (whether knowingly or by repeating something erroneous without checking it properly himself) is that nothing we learned from the Rosetta Stone changed any interpretation of LDS scripture.
Glad to have you as a political ally, PH. Just a bit of advice though: the Ford dealership’s probably not the best place to learn the truth about Chevies. Go talk to someone who owns a Chevy maybe…
Or maybe since the GM became Government Motors I should be reversing the terms in my metaphor…
Eliasim
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:57pmI‘d vote for a Mormon if the candidate wasn’t for big government. By the way regarding the Shroud of Turan and other miracles Jesus did: didn’t Jesus say that there would be no “Signs” for that generation? Oh yes he did and you don’t understand that thing, and therefore you look to create signs because you don’t understand language. You forgot he said there would be no signs.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:02pmBut, what of this generation? Yes, there will be signs.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:04pmAnd some people know there will be signs, and that’s why they are beating you up with technology in the news to harden your hearts.
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:07pmAnd how long is one Biblical generation? Don’t believe the hype! A Biblical generation is equal to 14 generations.
Report Post »Reader1234
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:05pmI agree and I’m mormon. I really don’t care what faith our POTUS has. I just want the government out of my life. No, I still like roads, policemen and firemen, but I hate all the social programs. Let me choose where my retirement money goes.
Report Post »tdalen8898
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:56pmMormons aren’t wicked nor do they hate the LORD, I think it is wrong to judge politics by there religion, unless they are dangerous, extremely dangerous
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:13pmI agree, Mormons are good people. One issue I have is that they have added to the Bible, and that is forbidden. It would not prevent me from voting for Mitt.
Report Post »derrickc
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:32pmNHWINTER:
How have they Mormons added to the Bible? Bible means books, plural. All of those books were written in different times. In Deut 4:2, it say that you shouldn’t add to the word of the lord, in the end of the Revelations it says the same thing. People interpret this as you cannot add to the Bible; since the books were compiled into the Bible hundreds of years after Revelations we can conclude that it was referring to those individual books not the Bible as a whole.
But if we want to go by your interpretation of thinking those versus are referring to the Bible then every Prophet who wrote anything after Deut. is damned for adding to the book, right?
Report Post »Captain0bvious
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:37pm>>One issue I have is that they have added to the Bible, and that is forbidden.
Actually that is misunderstood by many evangelicals. There is nothing forbidding adding information to scriptural cannon. Most of the claims people make about that come from massive misunderstandings of the creation of what we now call the Bible, and misreadings of specific scriptures. The Bible itself references scriptures that it doesn’t contain, that were lost over the ages, so to claim that you can’t add to the Bible is to claim that those lost scriptures are invalid.
Some religious groups like to claim the Bible is complete because it becomes easier to ignore false prophets when you ignore anyone claiming to be a prophet after the death of the ancient apostles. But whatever the reason that people want to assume a closed cannon, it is not scriptural. (I expect people to bring up a scripture in revelations as a response, but to reference that scripture in this argument is a complete misunderstanding of the scripture and the nature of the Bible)
Report Post »MadisonianRombot
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:38pmActually NHWINTER, That’s a common misunderstanding about what the Book of Mormon is. The Book of Mormon is a history of Christians who lived in America during Bible times. Since they were separated from the lands of the Bible, God provided them with their own scriptures. Also because many of these people were devout Christians but lived on the other side of the world, The Lord Jesus Christ appeared to them shortly after his resurrection and established his church among them. The Book of Mormon is a record of this and other events which serve as another witness of Jesus Christ.
Report Post »So the Book of Mormon is not an addition to the Bible -the scriptural record of Israel- but is instead a separate scriptural record of another nation.
ELAN114
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:07pmHow is it adding to the Bible if you are actually restoring what was lost and providing additional supporting refrence material? Personally I take issue with all the many versions that keep getting churned out where they dumb down the language or ban the word “virgin”.
Report Post »wizardofos64
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:48pmWherein is adding to the word of God forbidden? Deuteronomy? Revelation? When these “books” were written, there was no Bible.to add to. These were all separate writings, and were not compiled as The Holy Bible until many years later. The Old Covenant (Testament) WAS the Bible in the days of Jesus. A Jewish council met at Jamnia about 90 A. D. to decide which OT books were authentic and which ones were forgeries. Likewise, when the council met to determine the structure of the New Covenant (Testament), they had to make a decision which books were authentic and which were false.
Again, does the Bible of today include all the words and writings of Jesus and the apostles? No! The OT inself mentions at least 11 writing of the seers that are not found today.
More importantly, the NT mentions at least 4 letters or writings not in our Bible:
1. A letter by Paul to the Corinthians written before 1st Cor. (1 Cor.:5:9
2. An earlier letter to the Ephesian saints. (Eph. 3:3)
3. A letter to the Church at Laodocia. (Col. 4:16)
4. Some preophesies of Enoch known to Jude. (Jude 1:14)
If we accept the statements in Deuteronomy as pertaining to the entire Old and New Testaments, then we must accept the fact that every book after Deutronomy is invalid.
Again, which Bible is not to be added to? The Catholic Bible? KJV, NIV, etc.
In the Bible, we have what we have, and we praise the Lord for it; but let us not conclude that the Bible is a perfect book. It contains errors, but it is
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:45pmThere is plenty of sound archaeological evidence in the Old World that proves, if not the existence of Jesus, at least an economic, social, political, and religious order that makes his existence in and around Galilee, some time around 30 AD, extremely likely. From the New World there is nothing of the kind. It is in its archaeology that Mormonism most clearly shows its crackpottery. Its ideas as such are no sillier than those of other great religions.
Report Post »americanfirst
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:34pmI disagree with the premise that there is no archaeological evidence to Mormon theology.
Report Post »There is tons but none as enigmatic as the shared legend by most meso-american and south american civilizations that speak of a white bearded God who walked among them.
In fact, I would dare to say that we have more archaelogical data in this hemisphere than we do in the eastern hemisphere.
Reader1234
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:16pm@ LLOYD DRACKO
Archeological Evidence
You need to go to Tulum in Cancuun Mexico. It is an entire city built around the worship of three gods. One god called the Father. He is depictade on the temple walls as a man. A second god who visited the inhabitants of that city. He is depicted on the temple walls upside down because he came down from heaven and visited them. The thrid god is a ghost god and is depicted on the temple walls as a cloud with arms and legs. Sounds a lot like christianity in the New World to me. If you are a Christian you have to admit that this sounds very interesting. Google it and you will find images of these three gods.
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:26pmAmericafirst
Quetzalcoatl…When Spanish Conquistador Hernand Cortes appeared to the Aztec King Montezuma, Montezuma knelt to worship Cortes and welcome his return. He thought he was the Great-white Bearded God to return to his people. There are many names for Questzalcoatl in Central and South America, many tribes believed in this God.
And the legend as a parallel for Captain Cook in the Hawaiian Islands, were he was received as a diety as a returning white God…
But Anti’s dont wish to hear about that, it would require study in place of final judgment
Report Post »Reader1234
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:29pmSomeone please explain this article.
http://www.yucatan-revealed.com/Christ-In-Tulum.html
Report Post »Luke611
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:45pmREADER1234
Tulum is unexplicable to anti-LDSs and therefore avoided in debate. Anti-LDS do not wish to answer to intelligence, it doesn’t serve their purpose. Anti-LDS concentrate on speculation and accusation born of defacto incredilous abridgements of cut and paste techniques.
Report Post »I’m embarassed that you have proposed evidentiary tools to introduce discovery to debate logical and reasonable disinformation.
Lloyd Drako
Posted on December 24, 2011 at 12:47pmI am not at all anti-Mormon. “By their fruits you shall know them,” and except for the polygamous cults, the fruits of Mormonism are mostly good.
But archaeological evidence for a new world sojourn by Jesus is sparse in the extreme. Textual evidence (except for the Book of Mormon) is virtually non-existent. Pyramids, “triplets” of deities and the like prove nothing; they are encountered in tropical Africa and India as in Yucatan.
That some Native Americans had legends of “white, bearded” deities is equally unconvincing. Would Jesus really have appeared “white” to people whose skins were probably no darker than His? And do we know for sure that He had a beard? The earliest pictorial representations of Him in Old World Christian art depict Him as beardless.
Just askin’. Merry Christmas to all you Saints and Gentiles too.
Report Post »John 3:16
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:55pmMr. Graham I have much respect for your father but you sir make a huge mistake in your answer which leaves me in wonder about your faith or wisdom. It has nothing to do with Mormons or any religion. I would vote for a Mormon too but you and even many Blazers MISS THE ELEPHANT in the room. Qualification or “most qualified” Has zero importance ZERO!!! Rather we need to find the most HONEST candidate reguardless of qualifications. Who would Jesus vote for? The most qualified or the most HONEST and faithful? I contend Jesus would want us to vote for the most Honest and Trustworthy candidate not the smartest or most qualified. Please people look for the most honest Constitutionalist, and that in this case, is not the Mormon in this election. I want the most honest person working with me not the most qualified unless that candidate is both. MOSES was not the most qualified to lead the Jews but he could be TRUSTED and he was FAITHFUL.
Report Post »garyM
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:27pmGod put Saul in as King before David and Saul disobeyed God and God removed him! God allows every president, every prime minister, every leader, some good, some bad, all for his overall plan. Our only duty is to vote for the man whom we think would do God’s will regardless of popular opinion. No one joins God’s Kingdom after they leave this world, we start to work for God while we are in the world. we vote for the person who will do God’ will, after that action, we have pleased God, whether the candidate win or lose! God could put anyone in office, anywhere and any time. He just wants to see how His people will react to His will! God is allowing us to see how much wisdom we have, how much we know about the Bible, whether we can be deceived by someone who is of a cult or not! How do you fare?
Report Post »dcubed
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:58pmExcellent post. As a Mormon, Michelle Bachman is my 1st choice because she is more of a Constitutionalist than Romney. But it looks like Romney may get the nomination. Between Mitt & Obama, which is more honest, trustworthy, will defend the Constitution? Those Evangelistic Christians who refuse to vote Romney due to biases @ his Mormonism need to understand they lend support to Obama. They need to recognize our Nation is in serious trouble and it’s time ALL God-fearing people join together, and put doctrines aside, to elect leaders who will stand for righteous principles. I submit that Romney will protect Christian values better than Obama has already demonstrated.
Report Post »cbhill31
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:52pmWow!!! Interesting that individuals such as LOCKED and Steven Andrew take it upon themselves to judge who is and who is not a Christian. The very name of the Mormon Church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The Savior I know and follow wouldn’t discriminate against anyone of faith.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:16pmPlease reread my post. You obviously didn’t read it the first time. I quoted Andrew saying Christians can’t vote for non-Christian religions, said he was creepy, and that he gives a bad name to Christianity.
Report Post »cindybanks91
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:26pmYou’re right jesus would not discrimnate, it was those that were rejecting him and his teaching that were discriminating. My friends and sister who are mormons, are the ones who believe that only they will go to heaven. That if we don’t receive that holy ghost witness, and believe in the book of mormon we are lost. And you know that’s true. Who’s really discrimnating here? I love glenn, i love his show, but we don’t base our faith, on tingly feel good emotions, but on the word of god, “it is written”. Those scriptures are lacking nothing.
Report Post »hillplus
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:13pmcindybanks, Mormons don‘t believe that those who aren’t Mormon are lost, so I am thinking that you probably don’t have a sister or friends who are Mormon or you would know that! ;)
Report Post »UNZIPTHESHEEPOUTFIT
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:37pmThe LDS church has had 4 or 5 names since it was first founded – including some that did not use the name of Jesus at all. Better do some homework before you use the name of the church as some kind of “proof” that it is the TRUE church. As far as that goes, it would be called “The Way” or simply “The Christians” as the New Testament tells us the believers were known. UnzipTheSheepOutfit and see the wolf inside. I resigned from the Mormon church 25 years ago and have walked with the True Jesus ever since! Free indeed, free indeed, Thank God Almighty, I’m free indeed.
Report Post »WhiteFang
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:51pmDidn’t Jesus indicate that his followers (Christians) would be no part of the world’s affairs, not getting involved with the politics and affairs of men? – John 17:16
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:05pmI don’t know how you got that impression from that verse. If you choose to not get involved in fighting for whats right according to Jesus and trying to rescue the one country that has done more good in the world and done more for the Kingdom of God than any other, then that is your choice and you will be held accountable to God for your actions, (or lack there of), whether right or wrong.
Report Post »Your choice. Your conscience. Maybe your opinion will change in a few years when this country falls under the sway of secularism and your freedoms are gone.
WhiteFang
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:18pmWas Jesus part of the world when he walked the earth?
Was he concerned about who was to be the governor of Rome, Jerusalem, or any other government?
No, he was only concerned about doing his Fathers Will and preaching the good news of God’s Kingdom and training his apostles to do the same. The apostle James later indicated in James 4:4 that Christians should not get involved with worldly interests that are contrary to what God is accomplishing through His Kingdom.
Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:43pmJas 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Yet another lame argument pulled out of context from the Bible.
So do you vote? Do you care who and what your kids are being taught in school? Do you think Christians should not run for office? What have you done lately to further the Gospel? Nothing?
Report Post »Greenwood
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:33pmRational?………………the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one. 1John 5: 19
Report Post »“the world” the spirit of worldly persons guided by worldly wisdom, an ungodly human society or world.
Though we unavoidably live in the midst of that society as christians we must not enter into friendly relations with it lest we be condemned with it. 1 Corinthians 11:32
This is what Jesus meant when he said; I have conquered the world! John 16: 33
Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:54pm@Greenwood
I don’t need a Bible lesson from you about those verses. I want to see how those verses pertain to the topic. How do they pertain to getting involved in the political processes to effect change for good in this world and for the Kingdom. Whitefang is pulling verses out of context to say Christians should not participate in the process of governing our Christian nation. It has absolutely nothing to do with “being friends with the world”!!! No wonder the church is dying in this country………
It‘s getting to the point that it’s just not worth posting on this site anymore. Too frustrating!!!
Report Post »HippoNips
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:27pmNO , get a literal translation of the Holy Bible and throw out your NIV and other paraphrased versions.. The are not valid BECAUSE they change the meaning of the very word of God.
John 17:16
King James Version (KJV)
13And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
14I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
Report Post »Blacktooth
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:07pmRationalman,
You seem agitated over Jesus’ words in John 17 and the counsel there.
13 But now I am coming to you, and I am speaking these things in the world in order that they may have my joy in themselves to the full. 14 I have given your word to them, but the world has hated them, because they are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.
15 “I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one. 16 They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world. 17 Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth. 18 Just as you sent me forth into the world, I also sent them forth into the world.
Rationally, we need to understand the reason Jesus spoke this way, to get involved with the workings of the world’s affairs puts us in the hand s of the puppeteer Satan, who is the invisible ruler of this world. – 1 John 5:19
Report Post »BrunMan
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 10:10pmMay need to re-read those verses again. The Savior commanded us to not be ‘of the world,’ meaning not to be worldly or wicked. As in, many things taught within ‘the world’ are not of him, but rather another source, namely Satan. He never commanded all of us not to be involved in the affairs of the world. We must all work for a living, right? That’s a worldly affair, but not inherently wicked. He cautions us to be righteous in all our affairs, and not let ‘the World’ change us. We must however, still be involved in many affairs of the world and can still maintain our standards. In other words we must live and work ‘in’ the world, but must not be ‘of’ the world.
Report Post »Greenwood
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 11:03pm@BRUNMAN…………..you got it now explain it to Rational man
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:50pmAmerican people SHOULD prefer Christians for leaders, BUT, if the so-called Christian leader actively works to pervert the fixed Foundational Doctrine of the Country, that candidate is NOT a Christian, they are a LIAR.
If a candidate performs the Oath of Office, to Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States of America and actively adheres to that doctrine, than that candidate is principled.
WHY is it preferred to elect Christians? This Nation was founded on the 10 Commandments of God, and the moral codes (natural law) of Jesus Christ because they are FIXED and immutable laws, not the living organism found in democracies or the tyrants will. It is FROM those foundational anchors that every law is measured and the Founders knew those Laws never changed so rendering policy and judgments would always have the same narrow reading.
People not Christian don’t generally hold the same conviction of Founding intent, thus feel changing our Fixed Doctrine is no big deal, even though it corrupts every intent of this Nations underpinning.
Report Post »kifeb221993
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:55pmI am a Mormon and like all other Mormons believe in jesus christ as our savior and redeemer it is clear that you know nothing about the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints (Mormons) study up or you just look like a fool http://www.mormon.org.
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:59pm(cont from above)
But if a candidate is a Christian in name only, not action, or in code of conduct, that candidate is not worthy to be elected. If a Christian, or supposed Christian continues in unrepentant sin, they ARE NOT Christian, but LIARS and not part of Christ AT ALL. In fact that shortcoming makes that candidate even more dangerous than another candidate who will strictly abide by the Founding doctrine. Why? Because if the professing Christian breaks the Oath they are sworn to, they are an enemy of Christ and only use the name of Christ for self gain. In common terms that makes them a deceiver and no different than their father of lies, the serpent. That makes them unprincipled, and immoral.
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:04pm@ kifeb221993
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:55pm
I am a Mormon and like all other Mormons believe in jesus christ as our savior and redeemer it is clear that you know nothing about the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints (Mormons) study up or you just look like a fool http://www.mormon.org.
—————————————————————————————————————–
LMAO. Reading comprehension can be a great help in trying to discern what people are saying. My position is on the side of Mr. Graham.
On top of that I also made no mention of the sect commonly referred to as Mormon.
Learn to read, otherwise you expose yourself to the definition of fool.
I personally wouldn’t vote for Romney because I believe his political platform is French Socialist, and his is a broad reading of the Constitution. That is more of the same as Obama is giving.
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:06pmKIFEB221993 – Just curious, why did you capitalize Mormon and the name of your church, but not when you mention that Jesus Christ was your Savior and Redeemer?
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:29pmBrigham Young
“I have never yet preached a sertuon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good a scripture” (Journa1 of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 95; also see vol. 13, p. 264).
“I say, rather than the apostates should flourish here, I will unsheath my Bowie knife, and conquer or die. [Great commotion in the congregation, and a simultaneous burst of feeling, assenting to the declaration.] Now, you nasty apostates, clear out, or judgment will be put on the line … If you say it is right, raise your hands [All hands up], let us call upon the Lord to assist us in this, and every good work.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 83)
“I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins … This is loving our neighbor as ourselves, if he needs help, help him, and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p. 220). [Many were killed under what is called the "Blood Atonement Doctrine" Leaving Mormonism was one of the sins that the blood of Jesus could not atone for, and a person's own blood must be shed by Mormon priests as an atonement for sin.]
Report Post »audiemurphy
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:19pmAs a Latter-Day Saint I would contend that many protestants believe that the Bible has been miraculously preserved in perfection by the almighty god and that it has no errors and it contains all of God’s word. That is why they need no other Bible! The Book of Mormon is not the record of Gods dealings with the Jews as is the Bible. It contains a record of Gods dealings with the former inhabitants of the Americas primarily the central America region. If the bible contains the perfect translation and record of Gods teachings then that makes God the Author of confusion because there are thousands of different christian denominations in America who differ on the interpretation of scripture and Doctrine in so much that there is no way that a person could tell which is the right and true doctrine by an appeal to the bible. Hence prayer and Another testament of Jesus Christ in the book of Mormon sets forth the true meaning and set the honest seeker of truth on a more direct course to eternal happiness.
Report Post »Bill.Montana
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:25pmYour quotes from Brigham Young are not what Mormons believe. Brigham was a great colonizer, but sometimes rash and expressed opinions that few would accept. If you must criticize Mormons, please stick to the doctrines of the Church, not the opinions of one man. Even prophets are entitled to their opinions, and sometimes even prophets reach for truths that are beyond their grasp. Paul made some pretty rash statements about women as recorded in the New Testament. Do you practice everything that Paul taught, such as women being silent in the Church?
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:40pm@ audiemurphy
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:19pm
——————————————————————————————————
If that’s the doctrine you have received, so be it. If it came down to 2 candidates for political office for me, it would be settled by which candidate was most in line with the United States Constitution, and would refuse to veer from confirming that oath MANDATE to Support and Defend it.
The Bible that established this Nation was entirely Christian. It was Gods Providence that wrought our Independence, and His Laws and Jesus Christs moral codes (natural law), which are not changeable, anchored us to THAT doctrine, and no other. There may be sects of Christianity with various agenda’s but the measuring stick of “GOOD BEHAVIOR” does not extend beyond the Laws and Natural Laws as presented in the Bible.
Agenda perverts the founding doctrine. I don’t care if a person is Mormon, Baptist, Catholic or whatever sect. Their particular doctrine outside of the Laws and Natural Laws of God cannot be added as a conspiracy to pervert the Declaration and Constitution.
God doesn’t make mistakes, and it’s HIS will which establishes Nations. The Founders and settlers of THIS Country acknowledged that and proclaimed our Laws accordingly.
No sect has a right to claim an establishment of their particular sect beyond the original intent. To do so is to defy God.
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:51pmBill. The test of a Prophet is that he is 100% accurate.
Deuteronomy 18:22 � �When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.� (you shall not be afraid of him mean simply, his words are meaningless for doctrine).
Jeremiah 28:9 � �As for the prophet who prophesies of peace, when the word of the prophet comes to pass, the prophet will be known as one whom the LORD has truly sent.�
I do happen to agree with you that the gift of Prophesy will continue to the day of the Lord.
Acts 2:17-18 � ��And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy.�
Ephesians 4:11-13 � �And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.�
SECT doctrine has no place beyond Gods Commandments, and Natural Laws of Jesus in o
Report Post »dnewton
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:54pmI think we are past the time when it will be a given that any election will be between a Christian and another Christian or a Christian and a heathen. Evangelicals have been split into two camps, partially by the work of Chuck Colson and the period of co-belligerency of Evangelicals and Catholics against abortion. The result was a compromise of basic doctrine that ended up with an agreement between some Evangelicals and the Catholic Church that had the effect of a truce. The liberal Evangelicals consider Catholics as being so close to Evangelicals that Catholics no longer need standard salvation. The problem with a Mormon being the president is that the office confers great respect, or at least it used to before 2008. Some Evangelicals, the last of the Mohicans, think that Catholics are going to Hell faster than ever as well as Mormons. Voting for a Mormon president might confer enough approval as to cause the lost to be sucked into Mormonism at an accelerated rate whereas letting a Mormon sell you something at Staples will have a lesser impact. Of course, it could be that the Left will expose the Mormon religion as a set of beliefs no harder to believe than the coming of the Thirteenth Imam. I think that Evangelicals, the kind likely not to vote for a Mormon, are not going to be a deciding factor in this election nor in the future.
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 7:45pm@ dnewton
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:54pm
I think we are past the time when it will be a given that any election will be between a Christian and another Christian or a Christian and a heathen.
—————————————————————————————————————————
The litmus test is? What are the candidates positions regarding the US Constitution. Do they adhere to it (those who have held public office), and what are their approaches (idea’s) concerning allowing the Free Market to operate without a beast sitting on their shoulders. If they’ve misbehaved prior to holding office, they are not worthy to serve.
I don’t know the ins and outs of all Mormon Doctrine, or what makes a Baptist different than an Evangelical or a Methodist. Personally why do I care as long as their particular agenda‘s aren’t being pushed for public sectarianism or caprice. As long as the candidate will stand on the Laws of God and the Natural Laws of Christ and apply Constitutional issues by that standard, what difference does it make?
I do know the difference between Individual Salvation and Collective Salvation because a Church down South tried to lure my sister into their heather collectivism. Liberation theology is COMPLETELY anti-Christ.
Our president doesn’t have to be a church goer, as long as his or her agenda is to Support and Defend the Constitution.
Report Post »Bill.Montana
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:51pmThe10thAmendment says “Bill. The test of a Prophet is that he is 100% accurate”.
“Deuteronomy 18:22 � �When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.� (you shall not be afraid of him mean simply, his words are meaningless for doctrine)”.
May I kindly point out that you are contradicting yourself. First you say that a prophet is 100% accurate, then you quote a scripture and say that a prophet’s words may sometimes be meaningless for doctrine. I happen to agree with your second quote and statement, and that is exactly what happened with Brigham Young in some instances.
Report Post »The10thAmendment
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 3:41am@ Bill.Montana
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:51pm
The10thAmendment says
(you shall not be afraid of him mean simply, his words are meaningless for doctrine)”.
………….. (my words above)…………………………….
…………. (your comment below)………………………
May I kindly point out that you are contradicting yourself. First you say that a prophet is 100% accurate, then you quote a scripture and say that a prophet’s words may sometimes be meaningless for doctrine. I happen to agree with your second quote and statement, and that is exactly what happened with Brigham Young in some instances.
———————————————————————————————————————————
If someone claims to be a prophet and their prophesy proves false, that person is not a prophet pf God. He may be making predictions but unless his words are accurate 100% of the time he’s equal to the astrologers that challenged Daniel, not a prophet of God.
Thus, he and some gullible sheep might consider him a prophet who gets some right luckily every now and than, even in matters pertaining to God, but he is no prophet of God, but a false prophet.
Not fearing his word means quite simply, his testimony (prophesy) can be taken as a grain of salt and dismissed without fear of retribution from God.
Report Post »brother_ed
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:50pmI agree with Osteen & Graham.
There are differences among all the Christian faiths. Last I knew, there were over 1,200 different Christian denominations. We can argue over whether one should be dunked, sprinkled or unbaptized. We can argue whether the Sabbath is Sunday or Monday. We can argue whether anything is required for salvation than to simply believe.
I believe Romney is a Christian.
Beware of people who spew religious hatred.
Report Post »wisecarver
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:07pmBrother ED What is a Christian? According to Scripture a Christian is one who rests their faith in Christ alone for their salvation and reconcilation to God. It is through the cross of Christ, alone, that God has redemed us Christians. Mormons do not believe that. He is not a Christian as the bible (authority) would tell us.
Second, this “pastor” who is calling out Rev. Graham is majoring on a minor issue. He should major on the majors (feeding the church, defending the gospel) and minor on the minors. Christ is coming back, and history is working in that direction. We are to vote with our conscience and if one cannot vote for a Mormon, then so be it for them. I cannot vote for someone who believes in immorality to include abortion and gay marriage. I will though, vote for an unbeliever; which Mitt Romney is one; so is Obama. People need to get their theology straight.
Report Post »br.loynd
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:24pmHello I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latte-Day Saints, AKA Mormon. I am a christian, I know that it is only through the teaching a sacrifice of Jesus Christ that we can be saved. If you talk to any one of us or go to any meeting any can see that we hold Christ in the Center of our lives. Any person that, that is not too blind by lies and pride, can see that we are Christians. If you have any doubt, or to lds.org and see for yourself.
Report Post »marvel
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:45pm@wisecarver
According to the Bible, a Christian is one who has faith in Christ and follows his teachings. Most specifically, a Christian is identified by the Christlike love he exhibits towards others.
“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” (John 13:34-35)
Also, as latter-day saints we consider the Bible to be authoritative and binding on us, and we live our lives according to it’s precepts. Since both of us believe the Bible to be authoritative, then it is simply a question of interpretation. With that in mind, what you are really saying is that you don’t think Mormons are Christians because we do not interpret the Bible the way other Christians do. I’m not aware of any passage in the Bible that disqualifies Mormons as Christians.
Regards,
Report Post »Marvel
audiemurphy
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:11pm@10thAmendment
Report Post »I agree 100% with you that natural laws are what the founders bases the constitution on.
I also have read the 5000 yr leap. ( written by a Mormon) I might add.
My contention was that many anti mormons have posted negatively about the book of Mormon using the bible as a measuring stick to disprove it and Our doctrines and interpretations of scripture.
My point is that “mainstream Christianity ” that anti Mormons belong cannot agree upon most of the doctrines they espouse and they all use the same bible!
So for them who cannot agree on basic and important doctrines related to salvation ant the hereafter to then criticize and pass judgement on those not on the “mainstream” is ignorant and hypocritical at best!
HeSaidWhat
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:20pmNuff Said!!!
Report Post »josoph1
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:49pmI won’t vote for Mitt, but its not all because of his religion. Its because he can attack everybody running on the Republican ticket, and be extra nice to the Muslim in the White House. What a hippocrite.
Report Post »rbjet40
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:18pmThat my friend is a lie. You won’t vote for Mitt because he is a Mormon and you believe he is not a Christian because of what others have said. As for a Muslim in the White house, Obama is not a Muslim. He may pander to them, but a Muslim he is not. Romney has attacked Obama from the very first. Now either you watch or much MSNBC or ABC news or your just plain clueless. If you don’t like Mormons, be a man about it and just say so. Don’t hide behind false accusations and assu
Report Post »audiemurphy
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 6:22pmrbjet40 he said it was for reasons other than being a Mormon that he wouldn’t vote for mitt.
Report Post »u need to take him at his word.
But I disagree with his statement Mitt has been soft on Obama!
Mitt has slammed Obama at every turn.
Because Mitt won‘t call Obama a socialist on Fox news with Oreilly doesn’t make mitt soft .
He doesn’t need to fuel the flames already headed his way if he wins the nomination.
Although I will say this president is a socialist and should be called out as one. But that would be untrue because I think deep down Obama knows what he really is ; is a communist!
So mitt would be wrong to fall in to Bill orielly’s trap. Bill really wanted Mitt to say it on his show because think of the exposure it would give him as it reverberated thru the news.
Atleast Bill is no idiot he knows why sells.
gramma b
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:49pmIt’s surprising to me that there are so many knuckle-draggers, like this guy, in the United States.
Report Post »kentuckypatriot
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:48pmWho cares about his faith? We already have a muslim in the WH and that doesn’t seem to bother anybody!!
Report Post »SimpleTruths
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:08pmYou lie!
Report Post »LibertyGoddess
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:34pmLet’s see…the Christian that is in the white house now, or the Mormon that wants to be? I’ll take the Mormon. In the meantime, I see the Christian Taliban is at it again. We do not tolerate the original Taliban in this country and we won’t tolerate you. This country is too great for this kind of hate.
Report Post »rush_is_right
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 9:58pm“This country is too great for this kind of hate.”
why is it hateful to call anyone a muslim? (whether they are or not)
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:47pmI’m sure if you dig hard enough you can find a so-called christian pastor to spout off on anything.
Who is this guy and why should we care? Is he just a pastor in his mom’s basement preaching on the internet in his unholy underwear?
Report Post »HippoNips
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 8:15pmYou shouldn’t care. He uses a paraphrased version of the Bible that changes the very words of Christ and he meaning of scriptures
If a Moron uses King James version or before (pre 1970′s) , they are more Christian than anyone who doesn’t
Report Post »smackdown33
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:46pmIf it’s okay to vote for Jews, why not Mormons?
Report Post »kentuckypatriot
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:49pmGood question, and patiently waiting a response from anyone who knows the answer.
Report Post »Go-rin-no-sho
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:10pmI doubt there’s a person on The Blaze who thinks Andrew has any sort of point here…
Report Post »Johnny Cocheroo
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:45pmCouldn’t see this coming. (unless you paid attention last time)
Report Post »Hickory
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:45pmDid Andrew spew this out before or after he told you to send money? These rip off evangelists ride around in limos, live in mansions, cohort with buxum babes and then tell you that you, not them, are greedy sinners. Yeah, riiight.
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:51pmTrue. FYI no one in the Mormon church receives a dime for their service.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:56pmNot sticking up for Andrew, but do you have any proof of the claims you made concerning him?
Report Post »Or are you just spouting off. Granted, there are gross abuses in the name of Christianity. Just like any other group. Your claims are a common excuse for rejecting the truth. So proof is needed so as not to think you are not just trolling.
Hickory
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:57pmI am not a Mormon REGANBABY but, I respect them very much. We went to their study classes to learn about their religion. I don’t agree with some of it but, I respect it. The majority of Mormons are very dedicated to their religious principals. I can’t say that about my religion.
Report Post »Hickory
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:18pmRATIONAL MAN, have you seen what he rides in? I have. Have you seen his house? I have. Have you seen the crowd that follows him? I have. Visual observations are usually on target.
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:33pm@Hickory
Again, I’m not sticking up for Andrew.I don’t know him. But I’m not taking your word for it with no proof. I don’t know you either.
Report Post »UNZIPTHESHEEPOUTFIT
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 11:52pmNo just luxury homes, drivers at their beck-and-call 24/7, and unlimited expense accounts at the highest levels! Business connections and jobs in the wards!
Report Post »Kankokage
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:44pmThis is just getting stupid. You’d think in this day and age religious intolerance would be a thing of the past.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:57pmSince, Atheism is popular… and an intolerance of All Religions… just as Islam is intolerant of All Other Religions… you will have to live opositions.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:58pmWhat are you talking about? Religion breeds intolerance.
Report Post »Kankokage
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:02pmMilitant and activist atheists are the most intolerant of any group out there (aside from ex-mormons…who almost always are atheists…). What I’m saying is that it is an absolute shame that religious intolerance even has a place in this world. What good does it do anyone? What good does this Andrews bigot do to anyone, especially for himself, by showing such animosity towards another group of human beings? It is base animal instinct to be wary and hostile towards those creatures that look different and think different from you, but didn’t Christ teach us to put aside the natural man and be more godly in our behavior towards others?
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:07pmA hated church that does so much good and gives billions of dollars in aid a year to people around the world just proves one thing, that church must be doing something right to have Satan’s minions attacking it constantly, but a church that’s sole purpose is to kill non believers and and blow themselves up in the name of their God is simply frowned upon.
Report Post »UNZIPTHESHEEPOUTFIT
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:17amOnce more, Kanko — Jude 3 – “Earnestly contend for the faith that was once, for all delivered to the saints!” A true Christian is compelled to stand for the truth of the gospel. UnzipTheSheepOutfit and find the wolf inside – there to steal your salvation! Your ex-Mormon friend.
Report Post »Kankokage
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:28pm“Contend” for your faith? Great. But it is not Christlike to denigrate the beliefs and faith of others by twisting words and giving veiled insults. Doing so will drive the Holy Spirit away from you. It will not lead anyone to righteousness, and it will only harbor ill feelings between all parties involved. That is why the Lord counseled us that contention is of the devil, and not of God. God does not seek to break down faith, only to increase it.
Seeing you, an ex-mormon, seek to pull away members of the church is sorrowful to see. So you know, there is nothing that can knock me down in my faith. How did I get this way? A couple years ago I lost all my faith; I didn’t believe in the church, the scriptures, nor did I even believe God existed. All I was left with was logic and science, but I was unhappy. I decided to do a logical thought experiment by asking myself a series of questions. The conclusion, after only eleven of these questions, is that by logic and science God exists, we are of his species, and we are set up to be life him. How to get back to God, however, was entirely faith-based, and logic and reason could not get you there. There is only one religion on earth that agreed with these questions and answers: the LDS faith. I cannot deny it, nor will I.
Report Post »CARS60
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:43pmThese kind of views give Christiantity a bad name. If Mitt was running for the pastorate, I might have something to say. Obama says he’s a Christian and bad mouths all his enemies, sat under a pastor who hates America and wants God to damn it. God uses all kinds of people for our good, including so called non believers. Pick the man, pick him by his lifestyle, his attitude and his ethics and most of all pick someone who will advance the cause of freedom. The only prayer I have this election season is that Obama be a one time president. The rest is gravy.
Report Post »Hickory
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:21pmI’m with you on this CARS60.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:41pmI’m a little confused, I thought we couldn’t mention religion with politics? That’s what the atheist say and everybody knows their gods, or something. They could file a lawsuit.
Report Post »Go-rin-no-sho
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:08pmHah, objectivity? In politics?! Doesn’t exist.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:39pmMormons are a Sect of Christianity… just like Baptists (re John the Baptist, whose followers criticized Christ for being a Wine-o in the Gospel) is a Sect of Christianity!
Report Post »HMNSC
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:01pmSorry, but you are wrong. Mormonism can not be thought of as a denomination. This is a completely different religion. I hope everyone that’s voting understands this.
Report Post »cliffattheblaze
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:13pmI’m amazed at the ignorance of everyone here. You say that Mormons are just a different brand of Christianity like the difference between Baptists and Catholics? Are you kidding? Mormons are very different. They consider themselves to be followers of Jesus Christ, but their beliefs are very different. They have “scriptures” than the Bible, for example, and their understanding of the Trinity and God is completely different. Why doesn’t anybody look anything up before they comment, and that goes for Joel Osteen who obviously doesn’t know much about other faiths.
On the other hand that pastor Steven Andrew is nuts. He’s pulling scripture completely out of context. There were no Mormons back in bibilical times and Christians didn’t “vote” for their country’s leaders. Oh wait, the Mormons think they were the original Christians and that the faith was completely corrupted and had to be restored. But Steven Andrew is still nuts.
Would Steven Andrew say we can‘t vote for a Scientologist whose beliefs are even farther astray than Mormon’s beliefs? How about a Jew? Neither of them believes in Jesus.
This is nuts. This is an election for President of the United States, not for church elder or pope.
Personally, since most people adopt the faith of their parents or the person they marry or their best friend without actually knowing the theology, I think we should lay off of people of different faiths.
Report Post »UNZIPTHESHEEPOUTFIT
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 12:01amHas Mormonism changed in the last 25 years since I resigned? I was taught all the denominations were an abomination and that the Mormon Church was the ONLY TRUE CHURCH and that the Mormon Church only believed the “Bible INSOFAR as it was translated correctly” (and that always followed with the mental reservation that it WASN’T at ALL! That it was basically worthless and we were to follow The Book of Mormon and the current Prophet before anything that was said in the Bible! If Mormonism has changed, then so much for the “restoration”!
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:38pmSeriously? another Mormon hate article. @ LOCKED -what is so wicked about ROMNEY??
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:44pmWicked? Nothing. The religious fundamentalist in question is the pastor saying “Christians can’t vote for Mormons.”
I dislike Romney for plenty of reasons. His faith isn’t one of them.
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:49pmOkay then we can agree. I don’t agree with Romney on many things either but his religion should not be a pre-qualifyer someone who professes to be a Christian is quick to pass judgement on onther person on false premises. Mormons believe in the entire bible and that Christ is the only way back to heaven. anyone who says otherwise is misinformed. Period
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:00pm“Mormons believe in the entire bible”
Eh… Joseph Smith’s translation can be quite a bit different than a Bible based off the original Greek and Hebrew texts though. His translation was based off the King James version, which is a notoriously terrible translation in the first place. Excellent for fire and brimstone, of course, but it was used to support England’s version of Anglicanism, not to be a perfect translation.
I do give props to LDS for at least agreeing that there are a lot of errors in the translation. A lot of fundamentalist groups (esp. Southern Baptists) claim the KJV is 100% Truth with a capital T.
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:11pmOnce again misinformed. Mormons do believe in the entire Bible. I am a member and read the Bible daily. Its not hard to find the truth, but its easy to find false information since Satan works so to destroy truth. Just do the proper research, and if you dont believe that’s fine, but dont spread misinformation
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:21pm@Reaganbaby
I don’t think I am. What version of the Bible are you using? Heads to tails it is Inspired Version (Joseph Smith’s incomplete translation) OR the King James Versions (KJV), upon while the Inspired Version was based. The KJV is rife with translation errors compared to versions directly based off the original languages. Oftentimes it doesn’t change the message… but sometimes it definitely can.
Report Post »marvel
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:59pm@Locked
For English speaking members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the official Bible is the “AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION” (See http://classic.scriptures.lds.org/en/nt/contents).
Regards,
Report Post »Marvel
ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:42pm@ LOCKED
The Mormons use The king James Version, The book of Mormon is not a translation of the Bible, but rather a translation of ancient records found on the American Continent that was written by a civilization living in biblical times. Christ is the Savior of the world so the people on this side of the earth new him as well. John 10:16 (http://lds.org/scriptures/nt/john/10?lang=eng) mentions other sheep we believe he was referring to those not mentioned in the bible but in other places around the world. Also Ezekiel 37:15-17 talks about two records one from the descendants of Judah and another from Joseph (http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/ezek/37?lang=eng) if you read the Book of Mormon you will learn the people are descendants of Joseph. Take a look for yourself
Report Post »elosogrande
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:37pmIs Andrew unaware of the fact that there is no religion litmus test for the Presidency? He can be a Jew, Catholic, Protestant, ect. and still be The President of The United States.
As a Christian, I believe Andrews to be an embarrassment. He makes us appear foolish, incompetent, and uninformed…like him.
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:43pmAmen!
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:59pmWould you vote for an Atheist?
Report Post »The-Real-Enrico
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:32pmI vote only vote content or character. Most atheist have a chip on their shoulder and Muslim is a religion of hate. I could never vote for some one who religion that teaches indolence to others.
Atheist and Islam are both religions of hate that teach what or who to praise but what and who not to praise. They are all about negativity and nothing positive. Christian welcome others with open arms but the ones that don’t are not really Christians. Jesus make it clear to love everybody especially all of the pagans.
We are suppose to show love by leading with our actions. Shame on the people who try to force their beliefs by attacking others.
You can call your self a religion of peace or if atheist say that you are peaceful. That is all just lip serve if you don’t show it. Peace is a action and love is a action.
Report Post »stockpicker
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:36pmPastor Andrew is right on….as far as he goes.
Report Post »ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:46pmDead wrong! but don’t take my word for it study it for yourself on the LDS website
Report Post »Mahakala
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 5:10pmHe is absolutely dead wrong. Pastor Andrew needs to retract his statement.
Report Post »BBTX
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:35pmBy all means Andrew, back that opinion up with specific scripture.
Report Post »DavidZion
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 2:09pmAlthough Joseph Smith proclaimed all Christian faiths where abominations.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:32pm“Voting for non-Christians (Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists and others), or people who just say they are Christians but don’t rule in the fear God, results in God’s Judgment. The Holy Bible warns:
“Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the LORD? Therefore the wrath of the LORD is upon you.” 2 Chronicles 19:2
To have God’s blessings, will you follow this Biblical Christian voting guide and vote for leaders who rule in the fear of God?”
Religious fundamentalists are always creepy. This guy is no exception. Gives Christianity a bad name.
Report Post »kifeb221993
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:51pmI am a Mormon and like all other Mormons believe in jesus christ as our savior and redeemer it is clear that you know nothing about the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints (Mormons) study up or you just look like a fool http://www.mormon.org
Report Post »Kankokage
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 1:56pmYou need to re-read what Locked is saying before jumping to judgment. Locked is giving this Andrews guy a hard time, not Mormons.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 2:05pmWhat Kankokage said. I have plenty of issues about voting for Romney, but his faith isn’t one of them. I also have issues with calling LDS “Christianity,” but it’s pretty much semantics.
Report Post »cindybanks91
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 3:29pmHere is another Mormon link that is very informative http://4mormon.org/mormon-beliefs.php
ReaganBaby
Posted on December 22, 2011 at 4:01pm@ CINDYBANKS91
That website is not to inform members about the church. If i wanted to know what a big mac taste like I Wouldn’t buy Whopper, which is exactly what this website is, Whoppers! told by those who despise the church. for true information about Mormons one can only go to the official LDS website. http://www.mormon.org
Report Post »DavidZion
Posted on December 23, 2011 at 1:03pmLocked your Locked into the Law-good luck walking in the law every day every min every sec of your life. You WILL sin and be condemned.
Me I take grace and do my best to follow Jesus out of love not fear.
Report Post »