>Well, aside from the fact that the first massive 9/11 terrorist act in this country (Sept. 11, 1857) was committed by Mormons upon the Fancher wagon train, where 120-140 folks were massacred, Muslims call Christians “infidels” and Mormons call Christians “apostates.” In such a labeling, where’s the difference?
When the LDS Church found out about it, it tried the people and executed the leader. It was never sanctioned by the LDS leaders, and the investigation and trial cleared the LDS Church in that regard.
>LDS “Scripture” which says by revelation that Christian sects’ professing believers are ALL “corrupt”; that says Christian sects’ creeds are ALL “an abomination in His sight”; and that ALL Christian churches are “wrong” & should not be joined. [Source: Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv. 18-20...look for yourself.]
Not quite. When Joseph Smith asked God which Christian church to join (he was partial to the Methodist faith), the Father and Son appeared to him and Christ told Smith not to join any of them, as none were his church. He advised Smith that they taught the teaching of men as though they were his words, but that they were wrong.
So what? If Baptists believed that the RC Church was right, they would be Baptists.
>the “church of the devil” (1 Nephi 14:9-10 from the Book of Mormon), or the “abominable” church (vast references available upon request in Book of Mormon & LDS’ Doctrine & Covenants);
Those statements are to the belief that any church other than that founded directly by Jesus Christ is not of Him. Nonetheless, the LDS Church does not teach against any other church, and does not claim that followers of other churches are going to Hell (though some so-called Christians claim that all Mormons are going to Hell).
The sanctioning question is open-ended and there's evidence on both sides. This question probably won't be settled minus new evidence.
As for the LDS Church's after-the-fact response, that is the sorry part. For one thing, Brigham Young was both "prophet" and territorial governor when this occurred; therefore, even though he didn't remain much longer as governor, he could have immediately "stepped up" the response.
The "execution of the leader" you referred to just happened to be the 2nd child adopted by Young. (Is it any wonder it took almost 20 years for him to be executed?) And why was he the only one out of dozens of mass murderers to be executed?
Why did it take 17 years for the LDS Church to ex-communicate him? (The facts were known to numerous witnesses for years...it took almost 2 years to remove the LDS bishop, Isaac Haight, involved in the massacre)
I have to commend the LDS for a quite forthright lengthy press release on this matter from June of '07. (The only question is why it took them only 150 years to be so forthright?)
Not quite. When Joseph Smith asked God which Christian church to join (he was partial to the Methodist faith), the Father and Son appeared to him and Christ told Smith not to join any of them, as none were his church. He advised Smith that they taught the teaching of men as though they were his words, but that they were wrong.
Here, I'll let Smith speak for himself: "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight, that those professors were all corrupt....(Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith--History 1:19
So what? If Baptists believed that the RC Church was right, they would be Baptists.
Nowhere do Baptists say ALL [Catholic] creeds [are] an abomination in his [God's] sight, that those professors are ALL corrupt...
And if you somehow found me one out of millions of world-wide Baptists who did say that, you wouldn't have a Baptist alleluia chorus planting such a statement as a follow-up "Scripture" to the Book of Revelation (and then accepted world-wide by Baptists everywhere as "Scripture")
Those statements are to the belief that any church other than that founded directly by Jesus Christ is not of Him. Nonetheless, the LDS Church does not teach against any other church...
Millions of Book of Mormons of this teaching, and millions of Pearl of Great Price(s) with the teaching above, are printed in dozens of languages & distributed world-wide. (So what's this nonsense about not "teaching" against any other church? What if it's in print, it doesn't count?)
Besides that, the LDS Church has sent out a million missionaries--60,000+ presently--who go door-to-door with one of their four prime teachings being the so-called universal (meaning complete) apostasy of the historic Christian church (LDS teachers often say this occurred by the 4th century) & restoration.
Everytime an LDS missionary introduces the topic of the so-called "apostasy" (they are not teaching a partial apostasy) & restoration, they are indeed teaching that the Catholic church apostacized & that the Protestant church doesn't have any divine authority, either.
Some of the worst representations of Christianity were printed in 1966 and 1978 by an LDS apostle, Bruce R. McConkie, in a book called "Mormon Doctrine." McConkie's 1958 version was not approved by LDS leadership. But his ensuing versions were--from the First Presidency. (If you don't stop this nonsense that the LDS Church does not teach against any other church, I'll trot out the McConkie quotes & let others decide for themselves).
If Smith's 1820 'vision' was so life changing and the command from god not to join any of the other churches so strong, then why did he try joining the Methodist church in June of 1828?
Nonetheless, the LDS Church does not teach against any other church, and does not claim that followers of other churches are going to Hell (though some so-called Christians claim that all Mormons are going to Hell).
Brigham Young
"When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness" (Journal of Discourses 5:73).
"The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God" (Journal of Discourses 8:171).
John Taylor
"What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast." (Journal of Discourses 6:25).
Orson Pratt
"The worshipers of Baal were far more consistent than apostate Christendom; for they had a faint hope that Baal would hear and answer them; but modern divines have no expectation that their God will say anything to them or to their followers. Baal's followers cried from morning until evening for him to give unto them a miraculous manifestation, in the presence of Elijah; but to even expect a supernatural manifestation or revelation now is considered, by modern religionists, as the greatest absurdity. Baal's worshipers, therefore, with all their absurdities, approached nearer the religion of heaven, in some of their expectations, than those who falsely call themselves Christians" (Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, No. 1 (1850), pp.12-13).
Spencer W. Kimball
"This is the only true church ...This is not a church. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. There are churches of men all over the land and they have great cathedrals, synagogues, and other houses of worship running into the hundreds of millions of dollars. They are churches of men. They teach the doctrines of men, combined with the philosophies and ethics and other ideas and ideals that men have partly developed and partly found in sacred places and interpreted for themselves" (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, pg.421).
Bruce McConkie
"The gods of Christendom, for instance, are gods who were created by men in the creeds of an apostate people. There is little profit or peace in serving them, and certainly there is no salvation available through them" (A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, pg.545).
So much for the purity of mormons claim that they do not "teaching against other churches" or "does not claim that followers of other churches are going to Hell"