If you call Joseph Smith marrying 9 to 11 women already married to other men as "saving" them...
Decisions decisions!
Posted on 12/29/2007 8:34:35 AM PST by greyfoxx39
Anti-Mormon literature tends to recycle the same themes. Some ministries are using a series of fifty questions, which they believe will help "cultists" like the Mormons. One ministry seems to suggest that such questions are a good way to deceive Latter-day Saints, since the questions "give...them hope that you are genuinely interested in learning more about their religion."
This ministry tells its readers what their real intent should be with their Mormon friend: "to get them thinking about things they may have never thought about and researching into the false teachings of their church." Thus, the questions are not sincere attempts to understand what the Latter-day Saints believe, but are a smokescreen or diversionary tactic to introduce anti-Mormon material.[1]
The questions are not difficult to answer, nor are they new. This page provides links to answers to the questions. It should be noted that the questions virtually all do at least one of the following:
|
|
This was not a prophecy, but a command from God to build the temple. There's a difference. Jesus said people should repent; just because many didn't doesn't make Him a false messenger, simply a messenger that fallible people didn't heed.
Learn more here: Independence temple to be built "in this generation"
In Brigham (and Joseph's) day, there had been newspaper articles reporting that a famous astronomer had reported that there were men on the moon and elsewhere. This was published in LDS areas; the retraction of this famous hoax never was publicized, and so they may not have even heard about it.
Brigham and others were most likely repeating what had been told them by the science of the day. (Lots of Biblical prophets talked about the earth being flat, the sky being a dome, etc.—it is inconsistent for conservative Protestants to complain that a false belief about the physical world shared by others in their culture condemns Brigham and Joseph, but does not condemn Bible prophets.)
In any case, Brigham made it clear that he was expressing his opinion: "Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is." Prophets are entitled to their opinions; in fact, the point of Brigham's discourse is that the only fanatic is one who insists upon clinging to a false idea.
The problem with "Adam-God" is that we don't understand what Brigham meant. All of his statements cannot be reconciled with each other. In any case, Latter-day Saints are not inerrantists—they believe prophets can have their own opinions. Only the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve can establish official LDS doctrine. That never happened with any variety of "Adam-God" doctrine. Since Brigham seemed to also agree with statements like Mormon 9:12, and the Biblical record, it seems likely that we do not entirely understand how he fit all of these ideas together.
Peter and the other apostles likewise misunderstood the timing of gospel blessings to non-Israelites. Even following a revelation to Peter, many members of the early Christian Church continued to fight about this point and how to implement it—even Peter and Paul had disagreements. Yet, Bible-believing Christians, such as the Latter-day Saints, continue to consider both as prophets. Critics should be careful that they do not have a double standard, or they will condemn Bible prophets as well.
The Latter-day Saints are not scriptural or prophetic inerrantists. They are not troubled when prophets have personal opinions which turn out to be incorrect. In the case of the priesthood ban, members of the modern Church accepted the change with more joy and obedience than many first century members accepted the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles without the need for keeping the Mosaic Law.
Believing Christians should be careful. Unless they want to be guilty of a double standard, they will end up condemning many Biblical prophets by this standard.
Most "contradictions" are actually misunderstandings or misrepresentations of LDS doctrine and teachings by critics. The LDS standard for doctrine is the scriptures, and united statements of the First Presidency and the Twelve.
The Saints believe they must be led by revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which they now find themselves. Noah was told to build an ark, but not all people required that message. Moses told them to put the Passover lamb’s blood on their door; that was changed with the coming of Christ, etc.
No member is expected to follow prophetic advice "just because the prophet said so." Each member is to receive his or her own revelatory witness from the Holy Ghost. We cannot be led astray in matters of importance if we always appeal to God for His direction.
The First Vision accounts are not contradictory. No early member of the Church claimed that Joseph changed his story, or contradicted himself. Critics of the Church have not been familiar with the data on this point.
The shortest answer is that the Saints believe the First Vision not because of textual evidence, but because of personal revelation.
The Church didn't really "choose" one of many accounts; many of the accounts we have today were in diaries, some of which were not known till recently (1832; 1835 (2); Richards, Neibaur). The 1840 (Orson Pratt) and 1842 (Orson Hyde) accounts were secondary recitals of what happened to the Prophet; the Wentworth letter and interview for the Pittsburgh paper were synopsis accounts (at best). The account which the Church uses in the Pearl of Great Price (written in 1838) was published in 1842 by Joseph Smith as part of his personal history. As new accounts were discovered they were widely published in places like BYU Studies.
This is a misunderstanding and caricature of LDS doctrine. There is, however, the Biblical doctrine that the apostles will help judge Israel:
Since the saints believe in modern apostles, they believe that those modern apostles (including Joseph) will have a role in judgment appointed to them by Jesus.
Those who condemn Joseph on these grounds must also condemn Peter and the rest of the Twelve.
This question is based on the mistaken assumption that the Bible message that Jesus is Christ and Lord is somehow "proved" by archeology, which is not true. It also ignores differences between Old and New World archeology. For example, since we don't know how to pronounce the names of ANY Nephite-era city in the American archeological record, how would we know if we had found a Nephite city or not?
The term "familiar spirit," quoted in the often-poetic Isaiah (and used by Nephi to prophesy about the modern publication of the Book of Mormon) is a metaphor, not a description of any text or its origin.
The critics need to read the next verses. The Book of Mormon says that God may command polygamy, just a few verses later. (Jac. 2:30).
Many Biblical prophets had more than one wife, and there is no indication that God condemned them. And, the Law of Moses had laws about plural wives—why not just forbid them if it was evil, instead of telling people how they were to conduct it?
And, many early Christians didn't think polygamy was inherently evil:
The critics have their history wrong. The change dates to 1837. The change was made by Joseph Smith in the 1837 edition of the Book of Mormon, though it was not carried through in some other editions, which mistakenly followed the 1830 instead of Joseph’s change. It was restored in the 1981 edition, but that was nearly 150 years after the change was made by Joseph.
This issue has been discussed extensively in the Church's magazines (e.g. the Ensign), and the scholarly publication BYU Studies.
In Alma, the reference is to Jesus Christ, who before His birth did not have a physical body.
John 4:24 does not say God is "a" spirit, but says "God is spirit." There is no "a" in the Greek. The Bible also says "God is truth" or "God is light." Those things are true, but we don't presume God is JUST truth, or JUST light—or JUST spirit.
As one non-LDS commentary puts it:
In the Bible, there are accounts of God commanding or approving less than complete disclosure. These examples seem to involve the protection of the innocent from the wicked, which fits the case of Abraham and his wife nicely.
The Bible also says that Bethlehem ("the city of David") is at Jerusalem. (2_Kings 14:20) Was the Bible wrong? (Bethlehem is in the direct area of Jerusalem, being only about seven miles apart.)
I'm waiting for you to extend the same courtesy to Mormons who manage to attack the Bible; the very Book they say they believe in; somewant - sometimes - if it doesn't conflict with something Joe or Brigham wrote.
Who says he DID; oh Wise One?
Birds of a feather...
Well WE sure are!
You pathetic, so called 'christians' that won't even TRY to carry out the law are PATHETIC!!
We Righteous LDS Organization members follow the LAW and we do it VERY well!
Why; we've even got MORE law - although you Gentiles know it as the Word of Wisdom.
--MormonDude(Did I mention that you are pathetic?)
Good try; but not yet; it isn't!
HA Ha ha!
And YET you LDS Organization members CONSTANTLY refer to IT as the be all and end all of apologetics!
Your 'man behind the curtain' act is WELL known!
The issue is fundamental theology and what does the LDS do with the PERSON and DEITY of Jesus Christ and the authority of the scriptures (the texts as received in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek...not "as far as it is translated correctly, article of Faith #8).
Is the Book of Mormon the "fulness of the everlasting Gospel?" or is it another Gospel and so: "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." (Gal 1:8). What about Christ?
Answer those questions and then all the peripheral questions about Joseph Smith, whether or not he was a false prophet according to the rule set by Deut. 18:20 (a long list of failed prophecies exist); and all these other things will be answered.
|
Scientology is a newer religion than Mormonism...
  |
|
|
Don't make fun of them,
they have a right to have
their moronic beliefs respected.
  At LEAST we have the ORIGINAL writings of L. Ron Hubbard to look at!!
|
|
I TOLD you not to communicate with him.
Give it up!
I always find it interesting that those who do not want their practices and policies examined tend to trot out those few verses; hoping to stifle any more questions.
John 12:47, 48 "If anyone hears My words and doesn't keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who rejects Me and doesn't accept My sayings has this as his judge: the word I have spoken will judge him on the last day."
The verses quoted from Matthew 7, so often used (and misused) by those who don't like what they are hearing, doesn't prohibit judgment, it just warns that 1) You better not be guilty of the same thing and 2) You better make sure you are up to the standard. If you are OK in both of those areas, you are free to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
But as Christ says, HIS WORD is the final judge. We are not the judge or jury, the Word that the Father gave Him to speak is that which judges. We are the one in the court who reads the verdict, Unfortunately, those who are "guilty" often times want to shoot the messenger and pretend that we are on the bench. We are not...we just read the note from the foreperson of the jury.
Yeah, I know that you, Elsie, know the law was nailed to the cross.
But Mormon Dude . . . . ? He’s workin’ awful hard. ;)
While Adam and Eve had alive human spirits, they chose to rebel and be their own ‘life’. They passed that fallen nature which is at enmity with God’s righteousness along to all their descendants. The Cross was God’s way of restoring the life of God and therefore the Character of God back into the soul of men and women through the blood-washed spirit of man. The Cross sits at the center of time, endowing back through to Adam and Eve and forward to us and our descendats. What Adam rejected for the LIFE to direct him from his human spirit, Jesus makes available once again to ‘all who will’ allow him to be the deliverer from the fallen nature. By FAITH His Life is emparted to our human spirit, only by faith else man could boast of righteousness on his own as Adam and Eve tried to do. Mormons aren’t the only ones who don’t get it ... yet.
Amen. Sometimes, in bad moments, I have to remind myself of God’s Grace. Thanks be to Him!!!! None of us have even a little wiggle room to boast. His grace is sufficient.
Three people recorded his Adam God speech. Two of the original accounts agree and one doesn't. Guess which one gets quoted by detractors? Historical documents from the time period are not verbatim youtube transcripts we have from today. Some of Brigham's speeches were recorded in shorthand and not fully written out and published until decades later.
Paul refers in the NT to Christ as the "Last Adam". It is a title as well as a personal name. 1 of the 3 recorders of the ADam God quote seemed unfamiliar with with the Biblical use and sense of the name Adam. The other two accounts are in line with Paul's intepretation.
Donna? Maybe Donner was sick and got his sister to fill in?
It is true that there is a lot of Mormon-bashing going around and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Romulan or his candidacy but, aside from the tenents and canons of the church, I would like to have questions about LDS answered: Why was Mark Hofman (the notorious forger) so sought out by LDS leadership; why was his work so threatening to the church, so much so that it tried to buy every piece of material by Hofman available so it could be hidden away?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
