Posted on 10/08/2007 7:49:32 AM PDT by colorcountry
Not only is Mormonism a Christian faith, it is the truest form of Christianity, said speaker after speaker on the first day of the 177th Semiannual LDS General Conference. LDS authorities were responding to the allegation that Mormonism isn't part of Christianity. Made by different mainline Protestant and Catholic churches and repeated constantly during coverage of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, the claim is based on Mormonism's beliefs about God, its rejection of ancient ideas about the Trinity still widely accepted, and the LDS Church's extra-biblical scriptures. "It is not our purpose to demean any person's belief nor the doctrine of any religion," said Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland in the afternoon session. "But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?"
{snip}
The day's sermons included many familiar themes, including the importance of faith, the need for pure thoughts and actions, avoiding pornography reaching out to neighbors and eliminating spiritual procrastination. Hinckley talked about the destructive nature of anger in marriages, on the road, and in life, urging Mormons to "control your tempers, to put a smile upon your faces, which will erase anger; speak with words of love and peace, appreciation and respect."
It wasn't in JS' possesion at the time.
It wasn't on GOLD;
And; we actually HAVE it!
>> However, I also find that the Old Testament ... stir[s] the heart as well. <<
Please don’t misread me; I said *portions* of the Old Testament don’t exactly stir the heart *without* the New Testament to fulfill them. I do have the New Testament. (I’m sure that Jews, knowing these more deeply from a personal angle get these in their own right.) But, then again, I still find portions less than stirring, such as the geneaologies. And certainly certain prophecies against long-vanished kingdoms require considerable inside knowledge to “get.”
>> But they were not shown a dead body; they saw the risen Christ. <<
They also saw the empty tomb...
>> However, most of those who were converted afterwards did not actually see the risen Lord themselves. The converts had to accept and believe the apostles’ testimonies of the event. <<
But the witnesses were credible: they pointed to OT passages which foretold such things; they made falsifiable claims which weren’t falsified; they performed miracles. Smith’s stories aren’t corroborated.
>> Joseph Smith testified that he had the plates. He showed them to others, who testified that he had the plates. Anyone asking to see the plates today is told that they were taken back to heaven. <<
Hardly the same as the miracles at Pentecost, the blackening of the sky, the destruction of the Holy Altar, the empty tomb. And again: there WAS an empty tomb. The question could be asked: if the body was not raised into Heaven, where is it? But in the instance of the plates, who is to say that they ever existed in the first place?
>> Joseph Smith testified that he had the plates. He showed them to others, who testified that he had the plates. <<
But hadn’t the Three Witnesses already staked their entire lives on Smith, before he showed them the plates? And didn’t all three abandon Smith’s religion, eventually? And weren’t all three denied access to the plates until after the plates had allegedly departed from the Earth, so that their witness would HAVE to be inherently mystical? Quite far from being the sort of sold witness of the apostles, this is part of what I referred to as inciting children to giggle.
So whose testimony do we have? Joe Smith, a convicted spiritualist con man, Martin Harris, who had been denounced as “overbalanced by marvellousness,” “fanaticism” and “seeing spooks,” and Whitmer, who seemed to change his story about the corporeality of what he saw. If Smith and the three witnesses were ever needed to provide an alibi for an alleged murderer, only Cowdery seems like the type the defense lawyer would put on the stand.
As for the eight witnesses, all were members of the Whitmer and Smith families, who saw the plates only after Smith had very publicly proclaimed no-one else would ever see them again, were they not? And whereas the Apostles were killed for their refusal to depart from Christianity (except John), not one witness outside of Smith’s own family remained Mormon. That seems unlikely behavior if they truly believed what they saw, even if they didn’t refute their assertions.
I can scarcely imagine a less credible story, even if the claims weren’t so fantastic. Even if what Smith beheld weren’t miraculous and seemingly bizarre, I wouldn’t believe his story if what he claimed was as ordinary as a title to an old car. And this is why I ask, what evidence is there of the truth of Mormonism?
We believe that most if not all religions have some portion of truth in them (as well as the ideas of men), but they are dead in that they have no living prophet or priesthood authority. Even so, if they confess that Jesus is the Christ we don’t go around calling them non-Christians.
Why do you need to RENEW it?
Does it fade away with time?
Oh my goodness, there’s no mention at all that this is added text? That’s positively deceitful?
“The God of my father Jacob be with you, to deliver you out of affliction in the days of your bondage; for the Lord hath visited me, and I have obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of my loins, the Lord God will raise up a righteous branch out of my loins; and unto thee, whom my father Jacob hath named Israel, a prophet; (not the Messiah who is called Shilo;) and this prophet shall deliver my people out of Egypt in the days of thy bondage.
25 And it shall come to pass that they shall be scattered again; and a branch shall be broken off, and shall be carried into a far country; nevertheless they shall be remembered in the covenants of the Lord, when the Messiah cometh; for he shall be made manifest unto them in the latter days, in the Spirit of power; and shall bring them out of darkness into light; out of hidden darkness, and out of captivity unto freedom.
26 A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins.
27 Thus saith the Lord God of my fathers unto me, A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren.
28 And he shall bring them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers; and he shall do whatsoever work I shall command him.
29 And I will make him great in mine eyes, for he shall do my work; and he shall be great like unto him whom I have said I would raise up unto you, to deliver my people, O house of Israel, out of the land of Egypt; for a seer will I raise up to deliver my people out of the land of Egypt; and he shall be called Moses. And by this name he shall know that he is of thy house; for he shall be nursed by the king’s daughter, and shall be called her son.
30 And again, a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins; and not to the bringing forth of my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have already gone forth among them in the last days;
31 Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall grow together unto the confounding of false doctrines, and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to a knowledge of their fathers in the latter days; and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.
32 And out of weakness shall he be made strong, in that day when my work shall go forth among all my people, which shall restore them, who are of the house of Israel, in the last days.
33 And that seer will I bless, and they that seek to destroy him shall be confounded; for this promise I give unto you; for I will remember you from generation to generation; and his name shall be called Joseph, and it shall be after the name of his father; and he shall be like unto you; for the thing which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand shall bring my people unto salvation.
34 And the Lord sware unto Joseph that he would preserve his seed forever, saying, I will raise up Moses, and a rod shall be in his hand, and he shall gather together my people, and he shall lead them as a flock, and he shall smite the waters of the Red Sea with his rod.
35 And he shall have judgment, and shall write the word of the Lord. And he shall not speak many words, for I will write unto him my law by the finger of mine own hand. And I will make a spokesman for him, and his name shall be called Aaron.
36 And it shall be done unto thee in the last days also, even as I have sworn. Therefore, Joseph said unto his brethren, God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land, unto the land which he sware unto Abraham, and unto Isaac, and to Jacob. “
Even I can't argue with that.
But how do you know it was GOD that answered your question?
Seriously, folks, how can anyone defend inserting text into what is passed off as merely an alternate translation of existing texts? How is this not downright deceitful? Even if I believed that Joseph Smith was directly commanded by angels to add this passage, how is not deceitful for this passage to be published without making clear that this passage did not exist in the traditional version of the scriptures?
Punchline:
“Hey! You’re the one with the dirty pictures!”
A sensible answer. But I’m shocked at Genesis 50, right now.
It's the TOGETHER that we have differences about.
Hmmmmm, 5,000 or 11?
Yeah, I’m going with the 5,000. And I would point those asking to the NT. If they choose NOT to believe the Word of God, that is their problem.
|
IGNORE
button
|
“These same statements could be made of Islam without changing a thing other than ‘Christians‘ replaced by Moslems and ‘Gospel‘ replaced by sharia!”
Take you complaint to Paul then:
1Cor 6
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Or perhaps Christ:
Matt &:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Matt 19:17 ...if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
“The Gospel of faith in Jesus Christ has replaced the impossible requirement to follow the law without transgressing in even one jot or tittle else you are in violation of the whole law.”
One who has faith will strive for obedience,(see Heb 11) and when they fall short they will repent. Because of the atonement they will be able to find forgiveness. The gospel doesn’t remove our obligation to obey, it just makes it possible for the the barriers our failures to obey create to be removed.
Caught on the horns of a dilemma, and having unwittingly fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah 29, Anthon took the easy way out: He tore up the statement he had innocently given to Harris and denied Harris's story. Today Anthon's cover-up appears more blatant than ever.
No thanks. I have a hard time getting all the tar off!
When you get spun into a massive spam that wanders all over the place to show no problems, I tend to forget that I came to drain the swamp.
Just not 100% Christians
--MormonDude(I am complete!)
Sir, you seem to forget that our Living Prophet® was TOLD that many 'precious truths' had been removed from the Bible that men were then using, and GOD told JS the missing stuff so he could re-insert it.
And, if GOD tells you something, how can you then call that deceitful?
--MormonDude(Glad we got ALL the Gospel now!)
Both. It seems I did miss one of your posts, but would have included you in the list of recipients based on other of your posts, had I not inadvertantly left you off.
What I missed was ironically the post you had in supersized, colored fonts (not a good practice!), in which you detail how the fruits of the spirits are joy, etc. That’s not exactly logical, since the scripture does not say that joy is ONLY a fruit of the spirit. I’ve seen enough to know that heretics, apostates and pagans can be joyful. (Frankly, throughout this thread, Mormonism is beginning to remind me more and more of Bahai.)
Do you remember the Blind Melon video, “No Rain” of the little bee girl? So far, that’s what you’re making your “witness of the Holy Ghost” sound like. (As I write that, I’m reminded that honey bees are a symbol of Mormonism, aren’t they? Did I just accidentally stumble onto something here?)
How do you know any of this? That is what the Gospels say—and I firmly believe the Gospels to be true, as I am sure yo do. But you and I were not present to witness any of the events described in the Bible. We saw no empty tomb or miracles performed. We cannot speak to those who claimed to have witnessed these things. We do not even possess the original manuscripts of their records. So how do we know?
Skeptics say that the stories about Jesus were made up. Oh, they might admit that perhaps there was a preacher named Jesus; but they will say that most of the sayings and miracles attributed to him are fabrications. (Miracles abound in old documents.) They say that the Gospel stories appear to fulfill Old Testament prophecy because they were deliberately written that way. (Everybody knows that it is impossible to tell the future.) And so on, ad nauseum.
Smith’s stories aren’t corroborated. . . .
Are the Gospels corroborated? Certainly the Gospel writers largely agree with each other and with Christian tradition; but do you have independent, outside corroboration from a non-Christian source of the reality of the Resurrection?
But in the instance of the plates, who is to say that they ever existed in the first place? . . . . But hadn’t the Three Witnesses already staked their entire lives on Smith, before he showed them the plates? And didn’t all three abandon Smith’s religion, eventually? And weren’t all three denied access to the plates until after the plates had allegedly departed from the Earth, so that their witness would HAVE to be inherently mystical? Quite far from being the sort of sold witness of the apostles, this is part of what I referred to as inciting children to giggle. . . .
The issues surrounding the witnesses of the Book of Mormon are interesting. See www.fairlds.org for links to several articles that address the points you raise. Suffice it to say that I find the witnesses to be entirely credible.
I can scarcely imagine a less credible story, even if the claims weren’t so fantastic. . . . And this is why I ask, what evidence is there of the truth of Mormonism?
What evidence do you have of the truth of the Gospels?
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.