Why so many LDS threads?

08-May-2008 | Grig

[Grig]

I am posting this on behalf of many LDS freepers. They will post their own 'signature' to this in the comments below. --- Some of you have noticed lately a lot of LDS (ie: Mormon) threads here on FR. I'm going to tell you why.

For many years there have been several active LDS freepers here. We post to all the forums on relevant issues, and were happy to have a site where conservative values were so openly welcomed.

Those conservative values include faith in God, and freedom of religion. We fully respect the rights of all posters to express their opinions and views on religious matters, even when people choose to use those rights to express criticism of our own faith. We also support the ideas embodied in FR rules against religion bashing. There is no need for hostility and there should be no room for bigotry on FR. Every religion has it's miracles and mysteries. Every faith has things in it that are not or can not be proven, and things that run contrary to what secular science would have us believe. Someone mature and confident in their own faith generally doesn't feel the need to belittle the faith of others.

We have, to the best of our ability, conducted ourselves with civility and dignity. We do not feel that that respect has been returned by some posters (putting it mildly).

When Mormon missionaries were murdered, the moderators were kept busy pulling jubilant posts off the thread. When Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her home, we contended for months with posters who appeared to be motivated by religious bigotry doing all they could to smear the family and accuse the father. Several posters openly admitted their religious motivation in opposing Mitt Romney and confessed that no matter how conservative any Mormon was, they would never vote for one for President of the USA. When the Pope died, I don't think any Mormon poster posted anything unkind, yet the thread about the passing of our President recently needed many comments removed.

Nearly every thread having any connection with Mormons, or Utah winds up being hijacked by anti-Mormon activists who copy and paste the same false accusations over and over even when it has been clearly and factually pointed out to them on multiple occasions that they are bearing false witness against our faith. Everything possible is done by these activists to make FR a hostile place for Mormons, and for at least some of them, bashing Mormonism is all they do here. Their most recent project is trying to blur the fact that the polygamous FLDS is a separate and distinct religion from ours, just as Lutherans are a separate and distinct religion from Catholicism.

In our opinion, such poster do a great disservice to FR and to their fellow freepers by spreading disinformation and promoting hostility towards a people known for walking the walk of conservative values.

Why the moderators here don't see the behavior of these anti-Mormon activists as religion bashing is a mystery to us, but it is the moderators call to make and we respect their right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to be passive however. We have all spent many hours refuting the accusations leveled at our faith, but these wind up buried deep in a flood of comments, effectively shouting us down.

Recently some of us have decided to take a more proactive approach. Rather than try to wrestle the pig into taking a bath, we are just going to hose it down. We will actively define our faith here rather than just respond to accusations.

So expect to see lots of Mormon threads, now and for as long as we see fit to keep posting them (although probably not as many as there are Catholic threads). They will be about our basic doctrines and responses to common accusations. If you want to know what our faith is about, read the articles we post. We will post them as open threads and I encourage you to compare the difference in tone and spirit between what we post and what our critics say.

[MHGinTN]

Despite the following, the citation/lie will be repeated by Mormonism apologists for years to come no doubt ... 'wanting it to be' is not the same as 'it actually is' as shown with the orgasmic reaction ot a chaismus, or the soaring praise for the name Alma applied to a male, found in the DSS; you really don't expect the apologist posters to following your sound reasoning, do you? Mormonism apologists cannot afford to face the Truth! (see my tagline) In a 2004 issue of American Antiquity, Robert Mainfort and Mary Kwas (archaeologists at the University of Arkansas) exposed the Bat Creek Stone as a forgery. Mainfort and Kwas discovered that the inscription was copied from an illustration that appeared in a widely available book titled General History, Cyclopedia, and Dictionary of Freemasonry, published in 1870 (nineteen years before the finding of the stone).

[Elsie]

      
                       The Bat Creek Stone                                      Macoy (1868, p. 134) 

---

http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/batcrk.html

---

"It's better to know nothing than to know what ain't so."
--Josh Billings

[DelphiUser]

My sincerest apologies, I did not know that that counted as “potty language” I will not use that phrase again, are euphemisms like Barbra Streisand acceptable?

[DelphiUser]

You proved my point with your citation, God intends to be understood.

[Religion Moderator]

The bottom line is this, if the phrase is something that might cause a young person to blush then it is inappropriate for the Religion Forum.

[DelphiUser]

<Snipped out the entire text of John 17>

This teaching is an ABOMINATION to God.

Oh?

I said your creed was an abomination, it's not in the Bible. Nowhere in the KJV can you find the word "Trinity". Nowhere is the concept of one substance oneness in the Bible it is a misinterpretation of the doctrine of oneness Jesus is telling the disciples to have JUST LIKE HE IS ONE WITH THE FATHER!

There, can you hear me now?

You seem to keep misrepresenting what I say because you can't bear to face what I am saying, and that's just sad. Everyone else sees what I am saying in plain English. Go ahead and deny that I am saying the Nicene creed is an abomination because it contradicts the Bible, you;ll just look silly.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: This is the only place in the world where a son is said by otherwise sane men to be his own father. This world is both a type and a shadow of the eternities, show anyplace else where a father is of the same essence as his son, you can't.

U Said: Very good!

You have noticed that the CREATOR is different than His creation!

This is a nice piece of misinformation wrapped up in an attempt to look like you just don't get what I said.

Jesus was Begotten, sons are Begotten by there fathers, not created. Your children are no more "your substance" than Jesus is the "substance" of God the Father. This is the only place such a claim is ever made and that makes no such sense, why would God call Jesus his only begotten if he had not indeed begotten him? He would not, therefore Jesus was begotten, and has his own essence the bible overwhelmingly says this over and over, repetitively even (department of redundancy department alert here!) God's son God's only Begotten is just that, exactly what the Bible says it is, God's only Begotten son, not a piece of him, not a form of him, his son, and they are one but not in substance. In john 17 Jesus says so so over. Denying this truth makes the Nicene Creed an abomination in God's sight.

[DelphiUser]

Sigh, Again with three back to back Monster^TM posts?

Rather than write posts that no one will read, I am simply going to say you are wrong, I have been going though and point for meandering, multiplying point refuting you, but I am now confidant that no one in their right mind is going to read a post the size a response to your latest volume would entail, so I'll just say you are wrong (One unfounded assertion canceling out all of yours.)

From our back and forth so far, I have observed you constantly engage in arguments which are circular, you bounce from any topic you are not "winning on" to a new topic (that's how we got so many topics in one post...) and you suddenly become the grammar police if that's all you've got. (A flat earth tactic If ever there was one)

You can tout all the peer review you want, and it's still a standard of men. No prophet in the Old testament had a peer review before prophesying; Jesus did not get his sermon on the Mount peer reviewed before he gave it; None of the Apostles had their gospels peer reviewed before publishing, and neither did Joseph Smith, SO?

Joseph smith is a prophet of God because God said so, and God will tell anyone who asks in faith the same thing.

We can both quote experts, we can both give logical argument, you think you are winning, and in reality, I am winning Do you want to know why?

Because I am calling upon a higher power, when people hear your Molecular Biologist vs my Population Geneticist, and only one of us is calling upon people to pray, while the other is calling for peer review, who do you think people are going to lean toward, it's not the Guy with the Biggest posts, but the guy with the most support from God.

Now, I am going to spend the hours that would have been spent in tedious rebuttal of arguments already covered on this forum (covered time and time again) with my family tonight.

[Tennessee Nana]

Joseph smith is a prophet of God because God said so
______________________________________________

God never said so at all..

That is not in the Bible...

That idea is an abomination...

The false prophet Joseph Smith was a demonic conman, liar, murderer, jailbird, criminal, occultist, seducer of little girls, hedonist, unGodly, unChurched, hypocrite, enemy of God, persecuter of Christians, with innocent blood on his hands, thought he was above God, attempted to displace Jesus, used religion to steal and debauch, was finally destroyed by God when he shot his way out of jail, murdering 2 men in the process...

Hardly a prophet of the God of the Bible....

But a faithful prophet to Satan, the god of the underworld..

[Tennessee Nana]

No prophet in the Old testament had a peer review before prophesying
________________________________________

A man who is under a death sentence from God if he prophesises words that are not of God, does not need his work checked first..

[Tennessee Nana]

No prophet in the Old testament had a peer review before prophesying; Jesus did not get his sermon on the Mount peer reviewed before he gave it;
___________________________________________

Jesus was not a prophet..

Although the Moslems say He is...

Jesus has no peer...

The false prophet Joseph Smith peered into peep stones till his eyes hurt conning people out of their hard earned cash, but he was not a peer of Jesus.

Jesus is God...

Who would tell God HYe was wrong ???

Who would need to ????

God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? Numbers 23:19

[Elsie]

You proved my point with your citation, God intends to be understood.

You REALLY think so?

I think that SOMEone who would exhibit this kind of logic is an ABOMINATION.

[Elsie]

I said your creed was an abomination, it's not in the Bible. Nowhere in the KJV can you find the word "Trinity".

The word AUTOMOBILE is not in the Bible; but I'll bet you drive one.

---

Go ahead and deny that I am saying the Nicene creed is an abomination because it contradicts the Bible, you;ll just look silly

You can 'say' all you want.

You HAVEN'T proved it and your continued attempts to 'say' it instead of PROVE it is SILLY (and sad).

[Elsie]

This is a nice piece of misinformation wrapped up in an attempt to look like you just don't get what I said. Jesus was Begotten, sons are Begotten by there fathers, not created.

You illustrate the concept quite well!

NOWHERE did I say the Jesus WAS 'created'; did I!?

---

God's son God's only Begotten is just that, exactly what the Bible says it is, God's only Begotten son, not a piece of him, not a form of him, his son, and they are one but not in substance.

So you say...

Jesus said:

 

 

 John 6:46
   No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

 

 John 14:7-9

 7.  If you really knew me, you would know  my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
 8.  Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."
 9.  Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the Father'?

 

 

Your 'founder' was no different from these guys - wanting to SEE the Father - so he wrote him into his 'vision'.

 

Now THAT is an ABOMINATION!

[Elsie]

Denying this truth makes the Nicene Creed Book of Mormon an abomination in God's sight.

[Elsie]

LDS Organization members PRIDE themselves in saying that THEY 'keep the law'.

 

 

 

 

Paul wrote...

 

Galatians 5:12
  As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

 

 

Thinking of THIS:

 

Deuteronomy 23:1

  No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the LORD.

 

So; just WHO are these 'agitators' that attracted Paul's attention?

 

 

Galatians 5

 1.  It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
 2.  Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.
 3.  Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.
 4.  You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.
 5.  But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope.
 6.  For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
 7.  You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?
 8.  That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.
 9.  "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough."
 10.  I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be.
 11.  Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished.

[Elsie]

The Fourth is only 15 days away!

[DelphiUser]

I Said: Joseph smith is a prophet of God because God said so

U Said: God never said so at all..

God said so to me, I asked as the Bible said to.

U Said: That is not in the Bible...

The instructions to ask and how to know if an answer is from God are in the Bible at First John 4:1-3:

1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

I know that Joseph smith is a Prophet because I read the Book of Mormon, and the Bible, I prayed about the Book of Mormon as the Bible tells me to and my answer direct from God was that The book of Mormon was true, Joseph smith was and is a prophet of God, and that Jesus Christ lived in Jerusalem, and died for my sins.

My response specifically meets John's definition of a response that is from God.

U Said: That idea is an abomination...

I know you believe that... but you are wrong.

U Said: The false prophet Joseph Smith was a demonic conman, liar, murderer, jailbird, criminal, occultist, seducer of little girls, hedonist, unGodly, unChurched, hypocrite, enemy of God, persecuter of Christians, with innocent blood on his hands, thought he was above God, attempted to displace Jesus, used religion to steal and debauch, was finally destroyed by God when he shot his way out of jail, murdering 2 men in the process...

ROTFLOL! You just keep saying that, that will make it true!

I especially love how Joseph Smith, trapped in a jail cell (Where he should have been safe from lawless mobs) with innocent men who were there to visit him is attacked by an armed mob, and he's got six whole bullets to defend them with, and suddenly he's a murderer?

I suppose he should have done the world a favor, saved all those good people the trouble and killed himself. </Sarc>

U Said: Hardly a prophet of the God of the Bible....

exactly as a prophet from the bible. Are you saying that everyone knew who Jesus was? I submit that there were many good people in Jesus' day who did not know who he was Some of them even believed the rhetoric about Jesus spread by the Sanhedrin, I'll bet they believed they were right too, I'll also bet they never heard him speak, and never asked God about it.

U Said: But a faithful prophet to Satan, the god of the underworld..

Yeah, the Sanhedrin said similar things about Jesus, they even claimed he cast out devils by the power of Satan.

I guess some things never change...

[Elsie]

Some selections:

I know you believe that... but you are wrong.
ROTFLOL! You just keep saying that, that will make it true!
I guess some things never change...

[DelphiUser]

I Said: No prophet in the Old testament had a peer review before prophesying

---

U Said: A man who is under a death sentence from God if he prophesises words that are not of God, does not need his work checked first..

Do you even know what Begging the Question is?

So you agree that The old testament prophets did not get their work peer reviewed before publishing? Great that means that asking for a peer review of anything claiming to be inspired is not a valid. (Thanks!)