| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/23/2007 9:08:44 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Children pick at scabs |
Posted on 09/24/2007 8:16:13 AM PDT by colorcountry
Being excommunicated for apostasy by the Mormon church is one thing, but Lyndon Lamborn is livid that his stake president has ordered bishops in eight Mesa wards to take the rare step of announcing disciplinary action against him to church members today. "I thought if he could go public, so can I," said Lamborn, a lifelong member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who said his research into church history gave him "thousands of reasons the church can't be what it claims to be."
Stake President R. James Molina acknowledged Friday he intends to have Lamborn's excommunication announced to the wards at men's priesthood meetings and womens Relief Society gatherings, even with Lamborn now taking his case public. Molina, as well as officials at church headquarters in Salt Lake City, call such a public warning about an ousted member extremely rare. They say, however, church members must be protected from what discordant ex-followers may say to damage the church...................
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Thank you.
Question: Are you are eagerly awaiting the opportunity to volunteer for membership in a "disciplinary council" here on FR with the purpose of excommunicating any and everyone that holds a position in opposition to yours?
What will you suggest as punishment for those who DARE bring to light the fallacies of mormonism? I seem to remember that burning at the stake was considered appropriate punishment for heretics in the past.
What would be the comparative punishment you would mete out here other than the banishment of those who oppose you? Would there be an "editorial council" to screen the posters and posts for what you would consider allowing in the way of opinion on mormonism on FR?
I encourage you to continue your present mode of attack against us, as it is one of the best arguments possible of the consequences of power being sought for the purpose of stifling dissent. .
LOL!!
Then someone has stolen your screen name up above a few posts...and posted like an attack dog.
I'd look into that....Seems you've been hacked.
ROFLOL!!
Thank you Delphi.
I do appreciate your efforts to make the tone of these interchanges less “personal.”
I understand how difficult it must be when someone attacks a belief you hold dear. I understand tracer’s anger. He seems to not understand the difference between an attack of someone personally, and an attack on someone’s belief system. Every day, each of us are required to re-examine a belief we hold; Abortion, Global Warming, Death Penalty, Capitalism; Right to Life; etc. We should be able to discuss these issues in a rational tone using reason, and logic, and emotion. FreeRepublic forbids the use of personal attacks in making our point. It makes for impassioned yet polite discourse. I thank you Jim and the Moderators here, for giving us a meeting place for these discussions.
I have broad shoulders. I’ve carried the burden of the belife of my community and family that I am involved in gross sin, that I am weak, that I am vile, that I am lost and no good can come from me, simply because I no longer believe in Mormonism and I talk openly about why I’ve come to that conclusion. I am used to it. I am so thankful that Christ has saved me from the endless works, ordinances and covenants that Mormonism requires to earn exaltation for yourself and your dead family members. It was exhausting, demanding and very self-focused. But I didn’t leave because it was hard....I left because it wasn’t truth.
It is actually good that those outside Mormonism are seeing first hand the emotions involved when one chooses to leave Mormonism. We don’t see these types of attacks when someone goes from Presbyterian into Methodism, or even Catholicism into Assembly of God. Christians are Christians...unless of course they are Mormon, then one is not allowed to deviate in any way or they face the risk of ostracism.
This is the second time tracer has threatened the owner of this site with, “if you don’t play my way, I’m taking my ball and going home!”
I wonder what he thinks of that?
"BTW...I've read the BOM...and have known it to, from fasting, and praying in faith and with earnestness of heart to be a fraud from the beginning.""To be a fraud from the Beginning" is not exactly approaching something with an open mind.
I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me;If two complete strangers show up in MY vicinity and make wild claims; I'm gonna ask for ID!
Do you now intend to threaten me as well as FR? Bwahahahaha, sorry Religion Moderator, this is too amusing. I’ll step back up on the porch now.
I don't believe your post about the Iowa debacle concerning the minister had anything at all to do with him changing denominations but actually had to do with the sin and pain that is caused from adultery. Christians recognize that we all sin. It wreaks havoc on everyone in their own due time....even you Delphi.
There really are no "wounds" that you speak of when a Baptist girl marries and moves to a town outside her hometown then chooses to attend the local Presbyterian congregation. Your examples aren't relevant in the least.
Any Christian reading these posts knows very well that thier own families or parents don't really care if they are attendind a Evangelical Free congregation or a Mennonite Brethren Church or Southern Baptist as long as their child is a follower of Christ, the flavor of denomination is really unimportant. That makes us Christian.
Mormons however demand total adherence to the Prophet and to total adherence to Mormonism. If a child of Mormonism grows up to become a despised Methodist, they are ostracized from the community and the family.
We have seen that evidence on this very thread regarding me (who has left behind belief in Mormonism and now attends several different denominations and non-denominational Churches)
When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
OH?
Even Moses wanted to know what to tell folks after he'd heard GOD.
KJV Exodus 3:13-14
13. And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14. And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
OH?
Even Moses wanted to know what to tell folks after he'd heard GOD.
KJV Exodus 3:13-14
13. And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14. And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
OH?
Even Moses wanted to know what to tell folks after he'd heard GOD.
KJV Exodus 3:13-14
13. And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?
14. And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Amen!
Yow!
I kept getting responses saying:
Temporarily Unavailable
I guess it was POSTING my reply, even though FR didn’t come back say so.
The “First Vision” story in the form presented to you was unknown until 1838, eighteen years after its alleged occurrence and almost ten years after Smith had begun his missionary efforts. The oldest (but quite different) version of the vision is in Smith’s own handwriting, dating from about 1832 (still at least eleven years afterwards), and says that only one personage, Jesus Christ, appeared to him. It also mentions nothing about a revival. It also contradicts the later account as to whether Smith had already decided that no church was true. Still a third version of this event is recorded as a recollection in Smith’s diary, fifteen years after the alleged vision, where one unidentified “personage” appeared, then another, with a message implying that neither was the Son. They were accompanied by many “angels,” which are not mentioned in the official version you have been told about. Which version is correct, if any? Why was this event, now said by the church to be so important, unknown for so long? NOTES
Careful study of the religious history of the locale where Smith lived in 1820 casts doubt on whether there actually was such an extensive revival that year as Smith and his family later described as associated with the “First Vision.” The revivals in 1817 and 1824 better fit what Smith described later. NOTES
In 1828, eight years after he supposedly had been told by God himself to join no church, Smith applied for membership in a local Methodist church. Other members of his family had joined the Presbyterians. NOTES
Contemporaries of Smith consistently described him as something of a confidence man, whose chief source of income was hiring out to local farmers to help them find buried treasure by the use of folk magic and “seer stones.” Smith was actually tried in 1826 on a charge of moneydigging. NOTES It is interesting that none of his critics seemed to be aware of his claim to have been visited by God in 1820, even though in his 1838 account he claimed that he had suffered “great persecution” for telling people of his vision.
Lifted from material being posted by ex-mormons ...
|
This angel is the one who told Joseph Smith where the gold plates were buried and can be seen on top of most LDS temples. However, a close examination of early church history tells a different story. Some early Mormon sources which say that the angels name was actually Nephi are as follows:
The Times and Seasons Vol. III pp. 749, 753 ("He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Nephi."). [In modern printings of the History of the Church, this has been changed to read "Moroni". It is interesting to note that Joseph Smith lived for two years after the name "Nephi" was printed in Times and Seasons and he never published a retraction.] In August, 1842, the Millennial Star, printed in England, also published Joseph Smith's story stating that the angel's name was "Nephi" (see Millennial Star, vol. 3, p.53). On page 71 of the same volume we read that the “...message of the angel Nephi ... opened a new dispensation to man...." The name was also published in the 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price as "Nephi." ("He called me by name and said unto me, that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Nephi." (Pearl of Great Price, 1851 edition, page 41) The original handwritten manuscript of the PofGP dictated by Joseph Smith reveals that the name was originally written as "Nephi," but that someone at a later date has written the word "Moroni" above the line. All evidence indicates that this change was made after Joseph Smiths death. Walter L. Whipple, in his thesis written at BYU, stated that Orson Pratt "published The Pearl of Great Price in 1878, and removed the name of Nephi from the text entirely and inserted the name Moroni in its place" ("Textual Changes in the Pearl of Great Price," typed copy, p.125). Why would the church feel the need to change Joseph Smiths story? The fact of the matter is that Moroni makes much more sense than Nephi because it was Moroni who was alleged to have buried the plates in the first place. But, let's not forget, Joseph Smith said the angel was named Nephi, NOT Moroni. This is just another example of "The Brethren" changing Joseph Smith's story to make it more consistent and to remove (retroactively no less) all of the holes in Joseph's story. |
B>John 15: 24 If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. 25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause. 26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me : [KJV] [and if that isn‘t a clear picture of all three in one sentence of Jesus’s teaching the oneness in three --and the Hebrew word for ‘one‘ can also be translated ‘unity‘-- try reading the following sequence of scriptures … Deuteronomy 6:4 then John 1: 1; 14 then John 14: 5 - 11 then remind yourself with the Baptism blessing ‘in the name of the Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit.
Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
John1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. … 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
John14 5 - 11: 5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
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.