Posted on 09/29/2010 3:05:05 PM PDT by zippythepinhead
Atheists and agnostics know more about major world religions than many people of faith, while Mormons can answer more Bible questions than their Catholic and mainline Protestant counterparts.
Those are among the somewhat startling conclusions about religious literacy in America the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life drew after surveying 3,412 Americans.
Some of the multiple-choice questions were relatively simple: Where was Jesus born and who led the exodus from Egypt? What religion was Mother Teresa, what day does the Jewish Sabbath begin and what is the name of Islam’s holy book?
Others were more obscure: What is Indonesia’s dominant religion? Which Christians teach that salvation comes through faith alone?
About half the Protestants (53 percent) couldn’t correctly identify Martin Luther as the person whose writings and actions inspired the Protestant Reformation. Fewer than half of Americans (47 percent) knew the Dalai Lama is Buddhist and only 38 percent correctly associated Vishnu and Shiva with Hinduism.
John Morehead, director of the Western Institute for Intercultural Studies in Salt Lake City, had already noted religious illiteracy in the general population as well as in the evangelical community. But he did not expect Mormons to top them in their biblical fluency.
“Mormons tend to emphasize Mormon scriptures like the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible in their devotional life,” Morehead said in an e-mail.
Even some LDS scholars were surprised to find Mormons at the top.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
Then what was Smith doing with the hat/stone/golden tables thingies?
Joseph Smith was a magic mushroom addict who was killed by an angry mob after a life of defrauding others.
Oliver Cowdery was a sniveling sycophant who lost out to the even more sniveling Sidney Rigdon. Brigham Young was a ruthless opportunist who seized control of the wealth and direction of the Church and turned it to his own personal advantage. Sidney Rigdon wrote doctrine for the Campbellites before writing doctrine and most of the Book of Mormon for Smith. He lost out to Young and finished his days in Pittsburgh whining about how hard he had been treated.
Yet they all profited up until the day that they died...
He was being a Profit center.
[svcw hisses]
Then what was Smith doing with the hat/stone/golden tables thingies?
[Stourme chums the water 
]
Translating the compilation....
Jesus was NOT born in Jerusalem. Jesus was not born at Jerusalem. At means at the location of. Unless you want to say Jesus was born more like TOWARD in the direction of Jerusalem? And that is weak argument at best and and outright heresy at its worst.
Your quote of Math 2 was correct Jesus was born in Bethlehem at the time the wise man came to Jerusalem to look for him. Bethlehem was not a suburb of Jerusalem, It was then a separate town. And most importantly outside the walls of Jerusalem. Therefore Bethlehem could not have been a part of Jerusalem. I don't need a GPS or Google earth, or Joseph Smith's fraud of a book to know that. I just need my Bible.
Now let me get back to my history book about Joseph Smiths peepstones...
Bwahahahahaha ... I don’t care who you aqre, that there was funny. Smith had an iPod in his hat before iPods were invented, ‘cause the scribe he used said he didn’t have the plates there just his hat and peepstone iPod. Are you by any chance a fiction writer? You have such a great imagination!
It can also be interpreted to refer to all who were responsible for his crucifixion who were not "aware" of what they were doing, Pharisees, jews, romans, etc. My point remains, the BoM christ was vengeful and destructive while the Christ of the Bible was forgiving and peaceful.
"Amos is describing the day of Christ's death. It would be a day of lamentation, mourning, the sun would go down at noon day, the whole earth would go dark. Not everything that happened is included in the New Testament. Only what the early Catholics wanted you to have is there."
Uhm, your attempt to qualify the mormon belief of purposefully omitted scripture notwithstanding, you can believe what you posted to be so, but I find that the references are pointed more towards those Israelites who swore by the sin of Samaria (desecrating the temple and worshipping idols). That Israel would become a place of death because they resented worshipping God and had degenerated into pagans and heathens.
Amos.8 [1] Thus hath the Lord GOD shewed unto me: and behold a basket of summer fruit.
[2] And he said, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A basket of summer fruit. Then said the LORD unto me, The end is come upon my people of Israel; I will not again pass by them any more.
[3] And the songs of the temple shall be howlings in that day, saith the Lord GOD: there shall be many dead bodies in every place; they shall cast them forth with silence.
[4] Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail,
[5] Saying, When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit?
[6] That we may buy the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes; yea, and sell the refuse of the wheat?
[7] The LORD hath sworn by the excellency of Jacob, Surely I will never forget any of their works.
[8] Shall not the land tremble for this, and every one mourn that dwelleth therein? and it shall rise up wholly as a flood; and it shall be cast out and drowned, as by the flood of Egypt.
[9] And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord GOD, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day:
[10] And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day.
[11] Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
[12] And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find it.
[13] In that day shall the fair virgins and young men faint for thirst.
[14] They that swear by the sin of Samaria, and say, Thy god, O Dan, liveth; and, The manner of Beer-sheba liveth; even they shall fall, and never rise up again.
----------------
[Israel does not want to make promises to God. Instead, she has made promises to her own gods. She has *worshipped the gold *bull at Bethel. She has *worshipped the Baal-Asherah *idol at the city of Samaria (1 Kings 16:32-33). She has also *worshipped *idols at Dan and Beersheba. ]
http://www.easyenglish.info/bible-commentary/amos-lbw.htm
Therein lies the danger in not keeping scripture in context. Carving out portions allows a person to interpret anyway they see fit.
The Mormon doctrine of eternal progression teaches that God the Father was once a man, who progressed to Godhood through obedience to certain laws and ordinances. Part of this obedience involved getting married to a woman ("The Heavenly Mother"), who gives birth to God’s spirit children, who are sent to earth to inhabit bodies of flesh and bone. These spirit children, if they are Mormons, remain obedient to the laws of the Mormon Church, and are married in the Mormon temple, have the potential to become gods themselves. They will produce spirit children and rule their own planet. This process is then repeated.
The logical implications of this are as follows:
--The present God the Father and Heavenly Mother would themselves have had a Heavenly Father and Mother in existence before them, and they a Heavenly Father and Mother before them, and so on and so fourth. Indeed, not only does this logically follow through in Mormon theology, but many LDS leaders have specifically taught that the present God and Father had a Father above Him, and He above Him, etc. 1
--God the Father would have had to worship and pray to His God and Father as we do to Him.
--If the present God and Father of this planet is worshipped and prayed to by His spirit children, and if Mormon males hope to become gods in the same way, their spirit children would likewise pray to and worship them!
[At this point it is worth bearing in mind that the Bible says nothing about an infinite number of god’s past and god’s to come. On the contrary, Isaiah 43:10 is very clear when God states: "Before me no God was formed and neither will there be one after me." There was no god before God and there will certainly be no gods after Him. He is "the God of gods" (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 136:2; Dan. 2:4, 11:36). That is to say, although there are certainly so called "gods" in existence (1 Cor. 8:5), they are not true God by nature (Gal. 4:8). There is only one true God (John 17:3). ]
--If temple marriage is essential to becoming a god, as Mormons claim, then God the Father would likewise have been required to be married in a temple. Of course, there is nothing at all about this in the Bible.
--Jesus would have to have been married in a temple, otherwise He could not have been exalted and become a god (Christians believe He was always God, and not a god, but The God.). There is nothing at all in the Bible about Jesus being married in a temple, or even married outside a temple. Indeed, the Biblical temples were not even used for temple marriage, but for purification rites, and animal sacrifices.
--Some LDS leaders have not only taught that Jesus was married, but that He was a polygamist! 2
--If families are to be sealed in the temple as a family unit, to be a "family forever", what if one of those family members does not remain obedient to the Mormon faith? How can they remain together as a family, if some members of that family are disobedient?
--Bill McKeever of Mormonism Researched Ministry makes an interesting observation about eternal families. He asks how it can be that a Mormon family can stay together forever in eternity if, for example, the children of that family go on to become gods themselves and rule their own planets? Those family members could not be together if they are each ruling their own planets.
Footnotes
1. "We were begotten by our Father in Heaven; the person of our Father in Heaven was begotten on a previous heavenly world by His Father; and again, He was begotten by a still more ancient Father; and so on, from generation to generation, ... we wonder in our minds, how far back the genealogy extends, and how the first world was formed, and the first father was begotten" (Orson Pratt, The Seer, p.132).
"Some people are troubled over the statements of the Prophet Joseph Smith.... The matter that seems such a mystery is the statement that our Father in heaven at one time passed through a life and death and is an exalted man. This is one of the mysteries.... The Prophet taught that our Father had a Father and so on. Is not this a reasonable thought, especially when we remember that the promises are made to us that we may become like him?" (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp.10, 12).
2."Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee...We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into relation whereby he could see his seed [children] before he was crucified (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 82).
"There was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that non less a person that Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha an the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it." (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p. 259).
"In the Church councils, it was spoken of: "Joseph F. Smith_ He spoke upon the marriage in Cana of Galilee. He thought Jesus was the bridegroom and Mary and Martha the brides."(Journal of Wilford Woodruff, July 22, 1883).
"The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing his crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in doctrine of a plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were Mormons (Jedediah Grant, Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 346). "One thing is certain, that there were several holy women that great loved Jesus, such as Mary and Martha her sister, and Mary Magdalene; and Jesus greatly loved them and associated with the much; and when he arose from the dead, instead of first showing himself to his chosen witnesses, the Apostles, He appeared first to these women, or at least to one of them--namely, Mary Magdalene. Now, it would be very natural for a husband in the resurrection to appear first to his own dear wives, and afterwards show himself to his other friends. If all the acts of Jesus were written, we no doubt should learn that these beloved women were his wives." (Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 159).
Hey! You two get a room or somethin’, this is the RF afterall. ;^)
He was being a Profit center.
[Stourme takes aim]
This coming from someone who's religion has no prophets, has never had a prophet, and who's leaders have never in nearly 1800 yrs even claimed to have spoken to God.
The history of the Catholic church is so filled with the blood and tyranny it makes Islam look like a girl scout troop.
Who's priests have a history of homosexual activity. Who's very practices are condemned by Paul as being doctrines of devils.
But..... to you....
All of that is nothing...meaningless...when compared to the method by which Joseph Smith says he translated the Book of Mormon. No.. according to you...this is the thing that truly deserves ridicule...
Do I have that right?
mmmkay...
What is obscene about a cat getting it on with a giant lizard?
And that is weak argument at best and and outright heresy at its worst .
[Stourme calmly states]
You're arguing the semantics of a geographical location....
Uhm, ok...backing away slowly.
The Bible is not about semantics. It is precise in every way this includes prophecy. It could not be God's word otherwise.
Bethlehem and Jerusalem during the time of Christ were separate towns. I don't know how much more plainly I can say that. It is simply a fact. I know its hard to accept but the Joseph Smith's book of Mormon has lots of little flaws in it like this. It has lots of flaws, like the man who wrote it Joseph Smith.
Joseph Smith simply got it wrong. That is not hyperbole its simple fact.
Therein lies the danger in not keeping scripture in context.
[Stourme chuckles]
No, there in lies the danger of the Evangelical Wash Cycle(TM)
Put the scripture into the EWC and hope it comes out spun to something more palatable.
You quoted it ... but you didn't read it.
Amos
11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
Because they are cleaned
***
In your dreams natural man!
By who whoes opinion!
I forgot I had landed in “LDS” world...
[Ejonesie22 sneaks back to reality]
Meanwhile on planet Earth Joe Smith made the whole thing up, so Mormon had nothing to do with it which is fine since Smith was about as much a “prophet” are the fictional “Mormon” was...
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.