Posted on 03/08/2008 5:14:33 PM PST by Zakeet
Spanish-speakers are fueling growth in the local Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which recently opened new worship space on Tucson's predominantly Hispanic South Side.
Many local Mormon worshippers, like 47-year-old Juan Arroyo, converted to the faith from Catholicism while living in their native countries. Arroyo, a roofer who has four children, joined the church when he lived in Guadalajara, Mexico. He's been in the United States for seven years.
"I was missing something, and my life changed greatly after meeting the missionaries," he said in Spanish.
Nationally, the number of Spanish-speaking congregations in the Mormon church grew by 64 percent between 2000 and 2006. There are 639 such congregations in the United States.
[Snip]
The church is growing quickly in Mexico.
Church officials say its presence there began in 1875 when Brigham Young, then denomination president, called on six missionaries from Salt Lake City to bring Spanish-language materials about the church to Mexico. In 1885, a group of nearly 400 colonists from Utah arrived at northern Mexico's Casas Grandes River. Mexico's first stake was created in Colonia Juárez in 1895. By 1912, more than 4,000 members had settled in Chihuahua and Sonora.
More than 1 million members now live in Mexico, a predominantly Catholic country with a population of about 108 million.
(Excerpt) Read more at azstarnet.com ...
Moroni 9:7
And now I write somewhat concerning the sufferings of this people. For according to the knowledge which I have received from Amoron, behold, the Lamanites have many prisoners, which they took from the tower of Sherrizah; and there were men, women, and children.
Speak Up, Latin America, New Era, Sep 1972, 22
In 1901 the total membership of the Church was 278,645. Seventy years later a count was taken of the number of members in the Church who have some Lamanite blood and the total was 282,536. This sum, 4,000 greater than the total Church membership in 1901, includes Lamanite members from the United States, Canada, Mexico, Central America, South America, and the islands of the seas.
To help meet the spiritual needs of many of these Saints, the Church held an area general conference in Mexico City in August. Attended by thousands of Saints from Mexico and Central America, representing the Lamanite as well as Anglo members there, the conference provided them with firsthand spiritual food from the General Authorities.
Well that above quote certainly explains why the apologists are dishonest condescending jerks. If they acknowledge the truth about Joseph Smith their entire worldview is turned upside down! So they have to win any and all debates even if it means lying and distorting data to do it.
Trouble is their biggest problem is this Lying for The Lord tactic of deception. Unfortunately for them it proves their entire faith is satanically inspired because God doesn't lie.
LOL, no DU, time and time again you challenge us by saying that we really did not pray to begin with, or some other excuse when you are confronted that the results of our prayers are diametrically opposed to yours. Interesting that in the same breath you say that the most profound answers are the ones to join mormonism. Again, as a non-mormon my answer is diametrically opposed, therefore, according to you, my answer is not profound, thus not valid and I must have done something wrong.
The Bible tells us how to know when a message is from God in First John 4:1-3.
"The Test" is not based on feelings and emotions, my personal answer was not the "feeling" that is so often disparaged on these threads.
And how does this spirit answer DU? Verbally, vision in the night or the burning feeling in the bosom? Bottom line, by every basic means of definition it is based upon an emotionally linked feeling alone. And once again since you continue to side step it, the 1John passage if focusing upon the teachings of Gnosticism at the time. 1 John is not exclusive and should be used with other scriptural tests and evaluations. When those are applied, the message of mormonism is found to be that of a false prophet.
Moonies are nothing like Mormons, thanks for the smear.
I never claimed that they were the same, except for the fact that they use the same test that mormonism. Are their prayer invalid, since they use the same standard as you apply? Apparently you are not denying that. Since your standard test is the same and there are different results one must conclude that your test is flawed. Since it is flawed, subsequent items of faith based upon that subjective answer will also be suspect and flawed.
I never said the Book of Mormon could be proven true, in fact, I don't believe God wants it to be.
Playing with the facts here DU, and the electronic paper trail makes it clear from this post to conservativegramma
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1982682/posts?page=2310#2310
U Said (conservativegramma): 2nd correction: The only proof the BOM was translated by Joseph Smith is from Joseph Smith.
Nice try, Read Book of Mormon Evidences and Photographic evidence of the Book of Mormon How about a paper from Stanford about The Book of Mormon and Mesoamerican Archeology. Refusal to look at evidence for the Book of Mormon constitutes wilful ignorance of the topic you have chosen to debate.
Context here is that you were countering GCs assertion that proof of bom was Joeys word. You also earlier cited other articles related as inferred proofs.
Jesus cannot be "prove" to be our savior either.
Maybe not your savior, but He proved to be mine.
So your refutation turns out to be a collection of Straw men and Guilt by association.
Ah yes, the old lets throw out an unsubstantiated logic fallacy citation. Too bad the burden of proof for that allegation is on you and you have not supported it at all. :0
I assure you I could generate a list of massive proportions if I wanted to, but I know that that does not make it any more correct. The point is and was that dismissing the Book of Mormon as having no support what so ever is a tactic without merit. and you prove it by arguing the point.
And everyone rolls eyes (not another DU behemoth). Now with that out of our system, it is not so much a list of massive proportions that matters, it is the scientific accuracy and veracity of the evidence that wins the war in this arena. Support is different from facts. Flat earthers will find things that support their point, but is it valid, scientifically supported interpretations? Thus you perpetuate Hypothesis Contrary to Fact since youve never demonstrably proven anything.
I never meant to, nor did I actually say these "proved the Book of Mormon to be true" That would not serve Gods purposes, we must act by faith. You cannot prove to me that Jesus actually walked on water, I must and do accept that on faith.
Again, CG was challenging proofs and you were demeaning her for failing to accept the proofs. As I have pointed out before, I can show you places in a real Jerusalem that Jesus walked
. Can you show me REAL places here in America that Jesus walked? (crickets). Show me something in America regarded and identified by the archaeological community as being associated with Nephi.
This whole section is a giant Strawman, In that I did not say it proved, the Book of Mormon, but was undeniably "evidence for it's authenticity" you can argue (and apparently want to) each piece of evidence, but that was not my point either, The very fact that you have to argue these factoids means my statement was right.
Oh, the Black Knight argument has risen its head, because it was very clear by what you were writing that you were presenting proofs. Unfortunately, no matter how much lipstick you put on your pig argument, it is still a pig. And even if that was not your purpose, the simple FACT that you put these easily refutable EVIDENCES forward to defend joey and the bom shows the complete bankruptness of so-called mormon archaeology and geography.
Your other problem is that the very references you cited go out of their way to weaken themselves as even evidence of the truth of the bom. Once again, you claim to be vindicated, if being humiliated by the very sources to support bom is vindication, then I will let you have your illusion.
If I state that there is no evidence that microbes exist, and you show me one and I start arguing that your evidence is flawed, by the very fact of arguing against your evidence I have conceded your point whether on not I win the argument, the point has been conceded by you already because you are arguing against these sites.
Now here is a strawman argument if there ever was one. If your evidence is true and valid, it would stand up to rigorous scientific evaluation and support. To be flawed in this instance would indicate that you took your observations incorrectly or followed an incorrect procedure and as a result obtained an incorrect answer. Thus the issue is the validity of the data and the claims. What is more applicable here is that you are saying that flies spontaneously developed from garbage, and I am saying that the scientific evidence says otherwise.
Thus, there is indisputably evidence, or this discussion would not be happening. As to individuals disagreeing with discrete pieces of evidence, of course they do. I never said otherwise.
Has Jerusalem suddenly dropped off the face of the earth? Jericho? No city has been identified as being Nephite, Lamanite, Jaredite, etc. For example, Zarahemla was occupied for hundreds of years, but we still don't have any real evidence of it ever existing. The Book of Mormon describes a time period from 2000 BC to 400 AD and millions of people. No city they occupied has yet to be found.
Really? I went there from a link that said she was still active... I accept with out argument your statement that she has joined, make that former Baptist minister (It really doesn't affect my argument either way, so thanks for correcting me!)
Your should read your source articles a little closer DU. First off it is a he and not a she. Secondly, he makes a point to not say which Baptist denomination he was ordained under. Thirdly, as CG said its an Argument by Generalization or more specifically an Argument by Selective Observation or more to the point: cherry picking. Show me any Baptist denomination that accepts mormonism.
The Bible does not say, God says, a moot point, but a point none the less.
Back to your circular logic CG clearly showed earlier
God sez joey is a prophet
How do you know
Because joey said so
How do you know joey is correct
Because God told him he was a prophet (repeat cycle)
U Said: Point of the matter here is that of character. Smith has a documented history of lying. A forged documented history... Can anyone spell Mark Hoffman?
LOL right the guy that FOOLED the LIVING PROPHET and SEER of the church and his apostles. How well is that gift been working these days. BTW, this has nothing to do with Moses.
His fruits indicate that he is a prophet of God.
See circular logic listed above
Objective evidence vindicates Joseph Smith.
Then tell me why joey could not tell the same story twice in a row without contradicting himself. Why was he preaching against polygamy two months after being given the everlasting covenant to begin polygamy?
Since he didn't lie about anything else, who is to believe he would lie about being called a prophet? (All examples of bald unsupported assertions refuted with equally bald unsupported assertions). I guess, to some people illogic and unsupported assertions are good argument if it supports the conclusion you have already arrived at.
Oh this is so typically fluffy! When all else fails obfuscate. Cannot dazzle with brillance, baffle them with
Please show where I have ever referenced the Weekly World news, or admit that this is a thinly veiled attempt at Guilt by Association for an entity i do not quote, nor I do not even associate with.
Feigning ignorance, you know it represents a low standard of evidential proof. No, the only guilt by association is between the website you cited and their deeper links. The bottom line is that these websites are simply bogus works. If you accept them as facts, you probably believe in Bigfoot, the lockness monster and ET. Anyone can make a website and put anything they want on it does that make the information valid? Not in this case.
Most if not all the Anti sites here have been trashed, but anti's still quote them. I've been trashed.. has no one trashed you yet?
Want a waaambulance?
ask Mark Hoffman for some pointers on forging and off you go!
Well, you had the living prophet and seer how far did that get you? :))
Here goes mister Peer Reviewed, you know, I lost M&M's on how long you could go without complaining about something being peer reviewed...
Thats right, because it is a rigorous standard when dealing with such scientific related matters such as archaeology and related. It is a significant part of my world.
So? We were refuting a statement that said there was absolutely no evidence, you are arguing that it's bad evidence, so what, even if I were to concede your point, it's not germane to the conversation I was having. Do you insist that their are no proofs for the Book of Mormon?
To argue that the bom documents real human events here but all archaeological evidence is non-existant and admitted by the author is laughable and more so when offered by you as an evidence.
So what is proof Encarta defines it as:
proof n
1. evidence or an argument that serves to establish a fact or the truth of something
2. a test or trial of something to establish whether it is true
3. the quality or condition of having been proved
4. the evidence in a trial that helps to determine the courts decision
What you have offered up as proof has failed critical examination or is even denied by its authors. I have pointed out many items which if found would prove the bom. You can go back and re-read them at your leisure. Show me the ruins of Zarahemla, or other bom city, etc. I still wait for PROOF, DU. The few, scattered freakish oddities (that even mormon investigators have written off) does not prove anything, as there are simpler, more sound interpretations. Your apologists sites are also at odds with your GA, isnt their word on the matter enough for you?
I happen to agree with him, if by "Esoteric reasons" he means Faith. IMHO any one who joins the LDS church because of Academics will either gain faith or leave.
Well, the lack of objective truth to support that faith has cause many to leave the mormon church, and only those too ignorant to see the fallacies are the ones entering.
The argument was whether or not there were proofs, of course you can ad will tear down any work of faith, the bible is similarly destroyed by critics, does that bother you? No you realize the fallaciousness of their arguments as we do yours.
You may assert that the bible is destroyed, but that would not be the case. So far, archaeology has supported the history written the bible both OT and NT. In that it is factual in those areas, it has greater credibility in the realm of faith. In the case of the bom, it has no support in the realm of archaeology, not textural support apart from evidences learned from the boa and the kinderhook plates. No support except the say-so of joey.
U Said: How did God testify that the bom was his word through the word of Joey. I challenge you to provide chapter and verse that clearly states that the bom is his word. What meaningless drivel, I'd be ashamed to have penned such a "Challenge" if I were you. Sure, and it won't even be from the Book of Mormon... Articles of Faith #8
Who saw to it that aof 8 was written joey See Circular argument.
You then list your "proofs" There are unfulfilled prophecies in the Bible is it your contention that any unfulfilled prophecy negates the call of any prophet? (Yes or No, "just Joseph" not allowed by the rules of intellectual honesty)
Oh ho intellectual honesty, sweet. Nor is just a yes or no argument, why DU, I am shocked, shocked to see you apply a Black or White fallacy (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/eitheror.html). As I said earlier regarding Jonah - God revealed why He did not destroy Nineveh often reveals conditions and timing for fulfillment. If I were to follow your argument rigorously, you would have called the prophecies of Christ first return as false. In the case of the prophecy I cited was conditioned to occur not many years hence. There has been no inspired revelation as to why it hasnt occurred in a short time period under the conditions prophesied (as occurred with Jonah), in fact just the opposite happened.
Polygamy is not adultery by definition.
Splitting frog hairs again. It is and was under the law of Illinois and the USA at the time as a subset under bigamy, and when practiced while the wife was STILL married to and living with her first husband while joey was married and still living with his first wife meets the standard of adultery.
The Book of Abraham was translated so well that you can see where it was also quoted in the Book of Enoch which was recovered later.
Cite for me this quotation kind sir. Fact of the matter is joey failed to properly interpret the facimilies (nor even reconstruct them properly), his Egyptian Alphabet & Grammar clearly proves he used the scroll and still translated it incorrectly. Papyrology has successfully reconstructed the pieces and it is more than adequately intact, and finally, your LIVING PROPHET and SEER of the church is silent in acceptance of them as announced to the world the scrolls joey used.
The kinderhook plates were never translated, please proved me with the translation as proof it has or stop asking me to prove a negative.
It is a documented fact from mormon history that joey claimed to have begun a translation. For brevity, read this in History of the Church, vol. 5, p. 372, not an anti-mormon book but is the churchs official book.
As to the Greek psalter, do you have anything as a source beside Professor Caswell himself? He claimed there were forty people present, not one gave an account? Farms does mention this in their article: A One-sided View of Mormon Origins
Documented in his book and a newspaper article at the time. I can hear the old poisoning the well argument coming up already. However, Mr. McGee (FARMS reviewer) reviews of a book that reports the incident third hand as described and McGee does not question that the event took place. Your reference only has 6 lines of text on the issue you should really read these first. You may find more information at this pro mormon site :
http://www.mormonthink.com/greekweb.htm
Swindler con man and convicted... - Please prove any of the above... You can't it's been tried.
Documented by Fawn Brodie (one of those excommunicated apostates like the Three Witnesses to the bom). With supporting documentation discovered in 1971 of Justice Albert Neely's bill to the county for his fees in several legal matters he was involved with in 1826. The fifth item from the top mentioned the case of "Joseph Smith The Glass looker."
Violent criminal for ordering the sheriff to follow the city councils lawful orders? LOL!
Yep, the owners and operators of the Nauvoo Examiner were laughing too while running for their lives. As far as LAWFUL (do not be putting words in my mouth), it was unconstitutional then, it is unconstitutional now but the constitution never mattered to joey, he was crowned as king already by that time.
Danites? ROTFLOL Prove it.
Jeff Lindsey sez: Joseph was not the mastermind behind the Danites, but he gave them at least partial support initially, and his encouragement of militant action to defend the Saints may have made it easier for Avard and his Danites to flourish.
This is funny, this is the best you've got? A bunch of made up paper charges unsupported slander against a prophet of God? Well, I guess they murdered Jesus for claiming to be... Himself. so it's not surprising.
See wishful thinking and circular arguments
Please show a link to Joseph Smith's journal containing Chiasmus, I'm curious.
No electronic link only reference, look it up yourself
Joseph Smith's diary, the entry for April 1, 1834.
A the Lord shall destroy him
B who has lifted his heel against me even that wicked man Docter P. H[u]rlbut
C he [will] deliver him to the fowls of heaven
and
c his bones shall be cast to the blast of the wind
b [for] he lifted his [arm] against the Almity
a therefore the Lord shall destroy him
well you might as well claim he invented the Internet.
If he were alive today, he probably would.
Only Moses was on the mountain when God called him and you have no problem with that. Give CG back her glasses, the squinting is driving me nuts.
Lessee, brought plagues upon Egypt, lead Israel out of same, parted the red sea, brought water and food did joey ever display these proof his visit?
In order to refute the anti arguments I have to read and research them, it's easy to make assertions without doing the same. would you care to actually have a discussion on the merits of the Trinity being a biblical doctrine versus one that came from Constantine and Greek influence? No?? How about Greek influence on the early Christian church? No? ROTFLOL!
I could and HAVE presented the merits of the Trinity being a biblical doctrine - you are the one unable to get past Nicea. And I can easily discuss greek influence standard part of early church history. Would you be able to discuss Alexanderian and western church influences too?
Please show the Scripture where God said they should, or he would spare them if they repented.
U Said (thats me): (And Jonah KNEW that God would 'change His mind' if they repented and it angered him!--cf. Jonah 4.1ff: "But Jonah was greatly displeased and became angry. 2 He prayed to the LORD, "O LORD, is this not what I said when I was still at home? That is why I was so quick to flee to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. "!!!! Thus not an absolute prophecy.
So it's OK for the God of Jonah's day to "Change his mind" but not for the God of Today? I thought God was unchanging... oh, that's the Mormon God, Got it, yours is a changeable God (not biblical) because it was defined in 325 AD by men.
Now you are getting confused your mormon god had a daddy somewhere in the past and had to somehow progress and change. But then standard apples to dirt comparison Ive come to expect from you.
As for Jonah's prophecy being a call to repent, that is not what Jonah said to them in God's name, he gave no conditions and that is all I needed to draw a parallel, CG is saying Joseph's prophecy that the second coming would begin on a specific date proves he is a false prophet and conveniently leaves out the first part of the prophecy that says if Joseph lives that long, he didn't, BLAM conditional prophecies from God, both of them. Your "Logic" lies in ruins exposed as emotion, and not even well researched emotion.
Then why did joey prophecy that SINCE he didnt live that long NOR the prophecy indicated that it hinged upon that condition. Cant your god get their future figured out, or are they making it up as they go. Or are your gods vengeful and unbending in the face of deep repentance?
U Said: Here is the standard: "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously..." Deut 18:21-22 Which is a standard for any claiming to be the Messiahs, if this is applied to prophets, then Jonah has to go too. It's a simple thing really, a standard not applied across the board is not a standard.
Nothing about Messiahs here DU. Nor is there any presumptuousness in Jonahs prophecy God chose to suspend it due to their repentance. Ninevah was later destroyed under Gods judgement. Further, God explained it to Jonah nothing of the sort has EVER been done in joeys case.
(Moses had unfulfilled prophecies too, if those prove him not to be a prophet, then the Book of Deuteronomy goes along with your test... unintended consequences can be surprising!) you can start at the beginning, how many times did god create the earth according to the bible? (Chuckle Mormons know the answer to this BTW)
Sure, bring it on. And while you are at it, does our sun receive its light still from Kolob?
The prophecy you quote by the way is yet to be fulfilled, so?
Lessee few years doesnt equal 100+, mormon opponents not destroyed, within a few years mormons were driven out. Maybe god was talking about the mormons, cause is sure didnt happen to the gentiles.
And I presented an "error" in the book of Genesis, which if you are insisting on this rule will force you to throw out the very book you are basing your test (which was a test of for people claiming to be Jesus) out too. (pretty funny huh?)
I would rather you be more specific, I hate second guessing.
Moses only had his and God's word in the beginning, Jesus also said God would testify of him, as his proof, remember? So it's not a stretch at all to ask God to testify of his prophets, like Moses, and Joseph and he does.
Again, did joey part the red sea and bring plagues? Did joey heal the sick and the lame as Jesus did? Did joey rise from the dead? Sorry, non starting comparison.
Show me a piece of truly hard evidence, and I'll show you something that is subjective to someone else.
Sorry, burden of proof for bom is on you for that hard evidence :)
(You can call even life subjective, does that make it less real?)
Can you say illogical.
Godhead (three personages, one power, might, mind and strength, Biblical)
Wishful thinking, non-biblical
I Said: Deification of Man, Biblical
Psalm 82 again with mormon failed Hebrew understanding as well as being contextually challenged.
The term gods (82:6) was used in this context to describe those who were to preside over or judge others (82:1); these were men who had been given authority on earth to represent Gods interests and enforce his law. Were these true gods, they would not be dealing with the daily application of Gods law nor would not die like men. Further context is Is 43: 10 Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
(Please note the plurality of gods listed here, the Bible is now a polytheistic book by the very definition you seek to stick on us.)
Only through cherry picking, gross ignorance of Hebrew context and ignoring those other bible verses like Is 43:10 which maintains overall integrity to the word.
Yes, the truth is priceless, too bad your "logic" is writing checks that you just can't cash.
My logic is more sound than the Kirkland bank was. Yet you could not refute Jesus words, could you.
We are children of God, we are also spirits, I am a spirit, I also have a body. Just because God has a Body, does not mean he does not have a spirit, it also does not make him less powerful, it makes him more powerful
Sorry, DU, spinning things again. Bible doe not teach that God has a physical and tangible body, he his finite in that he isnt omnipresent, nor can he reside in our hearts.
Jesus was resurrected, was this some temporary sham resurrection? No? Then God has a Body today (That's why he's the living Christ).
His body does not fit the physical and tangible definition of mormonism. It is in a special category. While we are on the subject, how did the Holy Spirit become a god with getting his body too, or else why hasnt he progressed?
You are displaying here that your knowledge of the Gospel has been corrupted by the same Greek influence and relying upon the arm of flesh thing that led to the corruption of the church initially, philosophy and Logic over spiritualism.
Greek influences? No actually mormonism is closer to greek corruption than Christianity. You know, all them gods running around with the fruit of the loins thing, getting bored in heaven and coming down to procreate with women. You know, a mormon thing. But it is not your fault you are confused obfuscation and deceit have been hallmarks of mormon leadership from joey on.
Oh and thank YOU for showing the absolute intellectual vacuum that is mormonism today.
Placemark
Great job pointing out the following failed treatise by Delphi:
Delphi Said: I never said the Book of Mormon could be proven true, in fact, I don't believe God wants it to be.
Godzilla Said: Playing with the facts here DU, and the electronic paper trail makes it clear from this post to conservativegramma:
I Said (conservativegramma): 2nd correction: The only proof the BOM was translated by Joseph Smith is from Joseph Smith.
Delphi Said: Nice try, Read Book of Mormon Evidences and Photographic evidence of the Book of Mormon How about a paper from Stanford about The Book of Mormon and Mesoamerican Archeology. Refusal to look at evidence for the Book of Mormon constitutes wilful ignorance of the topic you have chosen to debate.
As Emeril would say - BAM! Caught in a lie right there! I hope everyone can see here how Delphi deliberately LIES. If you are a non-mormon considering the LDS please see this as proof the BOM is false and the LDS is false. God does not (past, present or future) advocate LYING, but SATAN DOES.
The following was also FANTASTIC!
Delphi Said: Moses only had his and God's word in the beginning, Jesus also said God would testify of him, as his proof, remember? So it's not a stretch at all to ask God to testify of his prophets, like Moses, and Joseph and he does.
Godzilla Said: Again, did joey part the red sea and bring plagues? Did joey heal the sick and the lame as Jesus did? Did joey rise from the dead? Sorry, non starting comparison.
Amen! I had been wanting to bring this point out. When God established the old covenant, it was confirmed and evidenced through the miracles of Moses, i.e., parting of the red sea, turning the Nile into blood, and on and on. When God established the new covenant, it was confirmed and evidenced by the works of Christ, walking on water, calming the storm, raising the dead. (As well as being the confirmation and evidence that Christ was who He said He was). The Apostles themselves were also able to do these things as the New Testament was confirmed and evidenced. What exactly did Joseph Smith do when the BOM was established? Eh Mormons? A restoration of the church would have been a monumental event if true (and I say that loosely) and should have been confirmed and evidenced the same way as the OT and the NT. What miracles did Smith EVER DO that confirmed this addition to the canon was of God? Ill probably be waiting until Hell freezes over for that answer and when it does come it will be full of holes.
Great job again Godzilla!
Amen!
And ALLELUIA!
I get a chuckle every time I read DU or seven or tanti or resty claiming the ‘anti’ site garbage has been trashed. I guess when you want to believe in a cult badly enough, even false claims are a comfort to the cultist.
http://packham.n4m.org/lds-prph.htm
PROPHECIES OF MORMONISM NOT USUALLY CITED BY MORMONS
Joseph Smith's Lying and Womanizing
Joseph Smith denied continually that the Mormons were practicing plural marriage; he insisted he had only one wife, as late as 1844 (when he had "married" over thirty women, many of them already with living husbands):
"What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers." (HoC 6:411)
This lying was prophesied more than 2000 years before:
Jeremiah 48:10
Cursed [be] he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully,...
(Compare D&C 50:17-18: Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? 18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God.)
Revelation 2:2
I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars...
Revelation 2:4 is a prophecy of Joseph Smith's unfaithfulness to his wife Emma:
Nevertheless I have [somewhat] against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
Revelation 21:8 prophesies Smith's adulteries, his dabbling in magic, and his lying:
But the ... whoremongers, and sorcerers, ... and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Jeremiah 29:21-23 prophesies his adulteries with his friends' wives while pretending to be a prophet:
Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, of [false prophets]... 23 Because they have committed villany in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbours' wives, and have spoken lying words in my name, which I have not commanded them; even I know, and [am] a witness, saith the LORD. Even modern prophecy condemns Smith's many sins (this is a useful quote when Mormons ask us to overlook Smith's little "mistakes"):
D&C 50:26-28 (speaking of the president of the church):
He that is ordained of God and sent forth, the same is appointed to be the greatest, notwithstanding he is the least and the servant of all. 27 Wherefore, he is possessor of all things; for all things are subject unto him, both in heaven and on the earth, the life and the light, the Spirit and the power, sent forth by the will of the Father through Jesus Christ, his Son. 28 But no man is possessor of all things except he be purified and cleansed from all sin.
Joseph Smith's false prophecies were also prophesied of in the Bible.
Deuteronomy 18:20-22
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. 21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? 22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Jeremiah 5:31
The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love [to have it] so...
Jeremiah 23:16
Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, [and] not out of the mouth of the LORD.
Jeremiah 14:14
Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.
Side comment: Note that this was said at the time Lehi was supposed to be a "prophet" in Jerusalem.
Matthew 24:11
And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
Matthew 24:24
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Joseph Smith claimed that he was ministered to by three personages claiming to be Peter, James and John. This event was also prophesied in the Bible:
Revelation 16:13
And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs [come] out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
Thanks fo posting that..
bump
15 ¶ The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, 16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:What does this prophecy mean? To non Mormons it is an unfulfilled prophecy in the Bible, To Mormons this was fulfilled when the Church began printing "Quads" or Books containing the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants all Cross referenced (become one) and bound together in one binding (one in my hand). To us this was literal fulfillment of biblical prophecy. I don't expect you to accept that as proof, it was not designed to be, it is a faith promoting event for the faithful, and we understand it as it was intended.
17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.Now there are some who say the Other sheep are the Gentiles, (which makes no sense because Jesus said repeatedly they would not her his voice, he was sent unto the house of Israel) But, OK, where are the records of him visiting the Gentiles personally? I this was just talking about he coming missionary work then why say he was going? Orthodox Christianity does not understand the Bible they revere because of the loss of the understanding of the true nature of God, the "Christology" you spoke of earlier.
Joseph committed some sin (Lying, adultery, polygamy, etc.) | Many Bible prophets committed sin if this disproves a prophet, the Bible just got smaller, worse, since it was compiled by men who claimed to be inspired, they are now shown to not be inspired, and that means the Cannon of the bible is worthless, worse yet, this is the same church that created the doctrine of the Trinity, it falls too. |
Joseph prophesied of things that have not yet come to pass, or had prophecies that were not fulfilled. | Many Bible prophets that have not yet come to pass, or had prophecies that were not fulfilled if this disproves a prophet... See above. Moses Jonah, and John the Beloved are a few who will have to be thrown out of the Bible by this standard. |
Joseph produced Bad fruit. | This is a highly subjective argument, and from my perspective, the fruit is excellent. |
Some other prophet said X or the church taught Y, or Scientists say Z | Contradictions and inaccuracies are found in the Bible (X dies here or all the bible suffers again) Many things have been purged from the Church in the Bible by the prophets and apostles charged with keeping the church pure. we have done the same, and those have been removed, so? (Y dies here or all the Bible suffers again) Scientists have also said that men can't walk on water and Water cannot be turned into wine by pouring it from one pot to another, women don't have virgin births and men don't raise themselves from the dead. Science is a poor refuge for one religion to use as an attack on another, glass houses come to mind... (Y dies here or the Bible suffers the same fate) |
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,Your very quotation refutes the Trinity!
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall awax old as doth a garment;
12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
Chapter 9. Valentinus - For some of them maintain that (the Father) is solitary and generative; whereas others hold the impossibility, (in His as in other cases,) of procreation without a female.So some people think God is all alone at the Top and others think he is asexual both are wrong, Got it.
They therefore add Sige as the spouse of this Father, and style the Father Himself Bythus.So some people think decided to call God "Bythos" which is a Greek name for kind of a Father nature, and that is wrong, Got it. Sige, or Basically a Greek name for the primal silence is his spouse and that's also wrong, Got it. Don't rename God after Greek Gods or Primal forces because that's not him, Got it.
From this Father and His spouse some allege that there have been six projections,viz., Nous and Aletheia, Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia, and that this constitutes the procreative Ogdoad.So re-making the Godhead into Greek mythology is wrong, Got it.
Chapter 16. Apelles -But Apelles, a disciple of this heretic, was displeased at the statements advanced by his preceptor, as we have previously declared, and by another theory supposed that there are four gods. And the first of these he alleges to be the "Good Being," whom the prophets did not know, and Christ to be His Son. And the second God, he affirms to be the Creator of the universe, and Him he does not wish to be a God. And the third God, he states to be the fiery one that was manifested; and the fourth to be an evil one.U Said: [Hmmmm sounds eerily similar to Mormonisms pantheon of the Father Elohim, the unnamed goddess mother of all the spirit children wife of Elohim, the Holy Spirit, Christ the Son, and Lucifer the evil one brother of Christ the Son].
Chapter 18. Ebionaeans - They live, however, in all respects according to the law of Moses, alleging that they are thus justified.U Said: [Hmmmm kind of like the works based salvation of Mormonism].
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?Thus, I say unto you, Show me thy faith without thy works and I will show they my faith by my works.
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
Chapter 20. Melchisedecians - And others also make all their assertions similarly with those which have been already specified, introducing one only alteration, viz., in respect of regarding Melchisedec as a certain power. But they allege that Melchisedec himself is superior to all powers; and according to his image, they are desirous of maintaining that Christ likewise is generated.U Said: [Wow, the whole Mormon focus of the Melchizedek Priesthood right here].
You were caught red-handed lying both to me and to Godzilla. In consequence NOTHING you would ever have to say would be trustworthy or worthy of any sort of discussion.
Good luck with that Lying for the Lord thing in attempting to prove you have the truth. God doesn't lie, neither do true servants of His.
Want an waaaaaamblance DU?
Interesting, You have repeatedly lied about what I have said, I have never lied about you. Please post a link to anywhere I have lied, or retract this additional slander against my good name.
She posted to you where you lied about providing proof of the bom. You obfuscated in your reply to me when I caught you in it, but it does not change the fact, you lied in your reply to CG.
Look CG, your kind of a newbie here (October of last year) if you want to throw your weight around, go ahead, but one of the fastest ways to have the RM monitor your posts is complain a lot. If you want me to stop posting to you, simple, stop posting to me, or about my church, and I'll leave you alone too.
Classical mormon bullying. More times than not, it is the mormons that go running to RM to try to get a thread shut down when it is not going their way an electronic version of Navuoo Expositor. So when you cannot support you evidence you turn to personal attacks yep, you have learned well from FARMS and Lindsey, et al.
U Said: You were caught red-handed lying both to me and to Godzilla.
Where? Prove it. I do not believe I have lied to anyone here. Please note that in order to lie, there must be intent to deceive. Simply stating that I was wrong about something like a scriptural interpretation is not telling a lie. Now Prove that I have lied, apologize, or stop posting, your choice.
See my earlier this post as well as previous posts. Equivocation doesnt cut it, nor does bullying.
Logically, you should be encouraging everyone to read the Book of Mormon and pray about it, because if it's false God will tell them and then nothing I can say will persuade them to follow,
Nope, that is the most illogical thing one can do. Since the bible already condemns it, it is spiritually, intellectually and historically void of fact and truth, makes it also a stupid thing to do.
BTTT
There are still a few clips not banned yet.
You don’t know why it is sad? All those poor young girls sold into marriage like cattle and teen boys thrown out. I think you do.
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.