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.)
Oh I forgot : )
Joseph Smith and your Organization sure worry about it!
It feels GOOD!!
It is a confirmation of prophecy!!
Elgee; you are wrong AGAIN!!
We SHOW what the LDS Organization has PRINTED, by their OWN printing presses!!
THEIR words are the ones that SAY what THEY believe; not ours!
Gee Elsie, did you just get here? God told Joseph Smith to change it. All changes are by revelation.
That revelation deal cures a lot of theological ills. How would you like to be their auditor?
“Uhh...you bought a Mercedes with company funds on the 20th. Who signed off on that?”
“Revelation. God told me to do it”
That's easily done, considering you haven't read that anywhere.
Isaiah 8 :19
And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead ?
8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
8:21 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward.
8:22 And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness.
We SHOW what the LDS Organization has PRINTED, by their OWN printing presses!!
THEIR words are the ones that SAY what THEY believe; not ours!
That isn't true and you know it. Although you personally have been relatively good about that. I have caught many if not most of your cabal members lying about Mormon beliefs and history.
Am I lying when I say that you believe in the Original sin?
I believe the Bishop of Rome was a better authority on the doctrine that Tertulian was at that time.
The Bishop if Rome rejected it as heresy. Tertulian left the Church where he wrote it and joined an off shoot.
How is it that 150 years later his heretical writing suddenly became correct?
It was adopted by Constantine because those he had convened could not agree and Tertulian's writings were such that you could read what you wanted in it.
It was adopted because it was abstract and didn't make explanations with any clarity.
For you to say they adopted a group of sentences is revisionist.
However, you certainly have the right to believe what you want. If you want to be a follower of a Pagan Lawyer you may.
I have had discussions with Lawyers concerning rulings by Judges. Their standard way of answering when confrunted with the facts is to say "Well, that is not the way I read it." and then go on and say "The way I read it...." and make it up just as the Lawyer Tertulian did.
Just because the Bishop of Rome rejected it as heresy and it was not accepted for 150 years doesn't affect your right to follow his teachings if you want.
I agree it is a concept. Just like Doe's concept of the "Mother Ship" that was following the comet.
Tertulian made up a lot of "concepts" that were adopted by Constantine to make the official Roman Empire Church.
That was the apostasy or falling away that was prophesied about in the Bible.
A bunch of Doe's followers accompanied him to the "Mother Ship" because they accepted the "concept".
I agree it is a concept. Just like Doe's concept of the "Mother Ship" that was following the comet.
Tertulian made up a lot of "concepts" that were adopted by Constantine to make the official Roman Empire Church.
That was the apostasy or falling away that was prophesied about in the Bible.
A bunch of Doe's followers accompanied him to the "Mother Ship" because they accepted the "concept".
Aw shucks, you stole my thunder in reserve ... I’ve been saving that for when some apologist tells me the use of the peep stone is as efficacious as the Urim and Thummim: “And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep ...”
“That was the apostasy or falling away that was prophesied about in the Bible.” Is this your Mormon opinion, or do you have proof that this is in God’s eyes the apostasy He spoke of through the New Testament?
Just because the Everlasting Covenant thundered out of heaven concerning plural marriage; it only lasted for about 47 years. I don't care if you want to follow the 'teachings' of WW or not.
For those who follow LONG accepted Joe Smith teachings; THEY get called bad names and told they are not MORMON!
I think it shows just WHO are the hypocrits here.
The New Testament tells us that the end will not come until there is a falling away.
The signs of the end that are also in the New Testament are all around us. Everyone can see that the time is short.
There certainly will not be time enough for a “falling away” now, so it must mean that it has already taken place.
The New Testament says that when you see these things it is like you now that Summer is close when you see the trees bud in the spring.
I believe that. If you consider it, you will too.
BTTT
Inman anniversary thread revival.
Inman thread revival salute...
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.