Agency, Priesthood, and Black Powder [MORMON - Open}

BYU-Idaho Devotional Presentation ^ | Jan. 13, 2004 | Elder David E. Sorensen

[Colofornian]

... The privilege of receiving one’s temple endowment is a serious matter...We are concerned...an increasing number of young adults 18 years of age and older are obtaining temple recommends from their priesthood leaders to receive their...endowment without the immediate prospect of temple marriage or full-time missionary service. Single members in their late teens or early twenties who have not received a mission call or who are not engaged to be married in the temple should not be recommended to the temple for their own endowment. They can, however, receive a limited use recommend to perform baptisms for the dead. The desire to witness temple marriages of siblings or friends is not sufficient reason to recommend one for a temple endowment.

...President John Taylor speaks of the requirement to “pass by” angels and Gods to enter into our exaltation.  

The time will come when we shall not only have to pass by those officers whom I have referred to say, to have the sanction and approval of our bishop, of the president of the stake, and of the president of the church but we are told in this book (The Doctrine and Covenants) that we shall have to pass by the angels and the Gods. We may have squeezed through the other; we may have got along tolerably well, and been passed and acted upon, and sometimes a "tight squeeze" at that. But how will it be when we get on the other side, and we have the angels and the Gods to pass by before we can enter into our exaltation? If we cannot pass, what then? Well, we cannot, that is all. And if we cannot, shall we be able to enter into our exaltation? I think not... (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 25, pages 161-162, June 15, 1884.)...

[Colofornian]

From the presentation: Single members in their late teens or early twenties who have not received a mission call or who are not engaged to be married in the temple should not be recommended to the temple for their own endowment. They can, however, receive a limited use recommend to perform baptisms for the dead. The desire to witness temple marriages of siblings or friends is not sufficient reason to recommend one for a temple endowment.

Translation for non-Mormons: "Given the billions & billions & billions of 'other-side spirits' that we need to convert to Mormonism, we need you older Mormon teens & young adults to come in & get dunked so that you 'represent' those spirits getting proxy-dunked on the other side. But that's it! 'Limited-use recommends' only status! Just 'cause you're an adult and you actually want to see your brother or sister get married...well, that doesn't cut it!"

BTW, the #3 responded to Lds FREEPER thread in 2010 (almost 1,700 replies) dealt with this issue -- how a non-Mormon mother could not even watch her own son get married (See Non-Mormon family not being allowed to attend son's wedding was wrenching)

[Colofornian]

From the excerpted presentation: President John Taylor speaks of the requirement to “pass by” angels and Gods to enter into our exaltation. "The time will come when we shall not only have to pass by those officers whom I have referred to say, to have the sanction and approval of our bishop, of the president of the stake, and of the president of the church but we are told in this book (The Doctrine and Covenants) that we shall have to pass by the angels and the Gods...But how will it be when we get on the other side, and we have the angels and the Gods to pass by before we can enter into our exaltation?..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 25, pages 161-162, June 15, 1884).

Do you want to know why Christians say Mormonism isn't Christianity?

It's simple.

Lds say fLDSism is not Mormonism!
Why?
Well, for one thing, the Lds claim that the fLDS have too many wives! [polygamy]

Well, you know what? Christians say the Mormons across the board have too many gods! [polytheism]

And this presentation -- given at a devotional -- shows indeed that Mormonism embraces many gods (plural)! That is not Christianity...

They can't even tell us the # of gods there are that they will "pass by" on their way to "exaltation" -- which, BTW, is Mormonese for becoming yet another god yourself!

Now Joseph imported more word-for-word chapters from the prophet Isaiah into the Book of Mormon than any Old Testament prophet.,

Now, were I to impose Mormon theology upon the prophet Isaiah's words, I'd have to change verses to read as follows:
* "I am the Lord, and there are others; apart from me there are multiples of gods." (A perversion of Is. 45:5)
* "I am the Lord, who has organized all things, who with a council of gods stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth with my fellow divine family members." (A twisting of Is. 44:24)
* "It is us who made the earth, and created mankind upon it. Our own hands stretched out the heavens; we marshaled their starry hosts." (A pretzel version of Is. 45:12)
* "I am the first, well almost, and I am certainly not the last; there are other gods all around me." (More twisting - this time of Is. 44:6)
*"Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are our witnesses. Are there gods beside me? Yes, I know plenty." (Utter perversion of Is. 44:8)
*"Before me generations of gods were formed, and so shall it be evermore happily ever after." (Ah, again, the Mormon "gospel" twisted version of Is. 43:10)

May I "sweetly" challenge Lds to go to the Bible they say they adhere to and meditate day and night upon Isaiah 43, Isaiah 44, and Isaiah 45? Isaiah reminds us, as if the above verses weren't enough, in 45:14: "'Surely God is with you, and there is no other; there is no other god.'"

[svcw]

“have not received a mission call” I thought it was required, how is that a call?
Then there is the marriage thing..........

[Godzilla]

IB4PDSPAM

[reaganaut]

ib4pd

[Colofornian]

“have not received a mission call” I thought it was required, how is that a call?

Missions for high school seniors graduating are heavily pressured...but not required...frowned upon if you don't...

Call?

Expectation. If your family has the $, & you don't want to be frowned upon, you go.

[svcw]

One of my cousins had a call to go to New York City. She spent most of the time dancing in Broadway shows.
Got married before time was up to another “called” missionary but they were straightened out and brought home,
Both ended up as Temple workers in SLC.

[DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis]

IB4PDSpam

[Jack Hydrazine]

What’s the point of this thread?

[Paragon Defender]

What’s the point of this thread?

---

New to the FR Religion section? It’s yet another in a long line of lame Mormon bashings by the Anti-Mormon gang!

[Paragon Defender]

Seekers of truth,

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There's an anti-Mormon group of people here that spends a great deal of their time attacking the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They post regurgitated propaganda on an almost daily basis.

They have a misguided obsession. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. The straw man argument is a big favorite and is frequently preceded by cherry-picking quotes or other material. After the "quotation" the attacker will misrepresent what has been said or what was meant and then attack their own interpretation.Later they will have the audacity to claim they were "only" quoting our own material.  

They will of course insist ad nauseum that they are merely using our sources and are therefore innocent of any deceptive practice. LDS persons have no issue whatsoever having our scriptures or leaders quoted as long as it is presented fairly and accurately. This is rarely (if ever) done.

Another favorite is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma. They make something out of nothing while never bringing up a single objection that hasn't been addressed a hundred times before.

You might note a couple of other tactics used to try to antagonize is the use of disrespectful or insulting terms or language and/or pictures. That's a Christlike thing to do right? Yeah I don't think so either. It does speak volumes about them though.

Some of them claim being some sort of special witness to you as being supposedly former Mormons. So someone who is an ex-member of any organization would never have an axe to grind or have reason to try to justify their actions by any means? Perhaps not but perhaps so. The LDS Church gains members from other denominations as well as others faiths all the time. This doesn't make them an expert on anything and you certainly won't hear them attacking their former Church.

Frequently they cruise the headlines of the day seeking any story that might be twisted into making the Church look bad. Anything will do, just watch the progression of posts following it and see what I mean.

After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever "issue" they seem to be "revealing" or "exposing". I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the "ahah" moments you will have will be many and frequent. You will start to recognize the tactics employed to cleverly twist and attack and will likely chuckle the more you see. In actuality, there's nothing new here. It's all been addressed many times before.

The latest twist in the anti-Mormon propaganda machine is to actually go to the links provided, but then they cherry pick what they want, quote and straw man attack that. Almost without fail you will see examples of this following this post.

Clever. It almost appears that they are helping you out by doing some footwork for you. Not so much. Don't be insulted, look for yourself. It's not the haystack they want you to think. So again, seek the truth. They aren't providing it. Use your God-given brain and discernment.

Here's a few links to get your started from a different viewpoint. I have found that the vast majority of the "issues" brought up can be found and addressed at http://www.fairlds.org/ but here's more:

http://scriptures.lds.org/
http://www.lds.org
http://www.fairlds.org/
http://www.mormonapologetics.org/
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Main_Page
http://www.lightplanet.com/response/index.html
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml
http://www.answeringantimormons.com/index.htm
http://promormon.blogspot.com/

Now you will likely notice the "you never address or answer our points" posts pop up as usual. All after providing the answers just as you have here.

Sometimes it is claimed that these sites present a needle in a haystack. Far from it. But if you give up before you try you won't know will you? They often state that these sites provide no answer. They just don't want you looking. It is as simple as that.

Will you wear blinders too? Seek truth. Find out for yourself. Want to chat with someone on any topic? A few of these sites provide just that. So do your homework sincere seeker of truth. Listen and read from both "sides". Make up your own mind.

I witness to you of these truths and wish you the best, in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.

 

[Paragon Defender]

I really think the anti-Mormon threads should have to use an Anti-Mormon tag or something of the like. It is deceptive that they say (Mormon - Open) as that suggests that it is a Mormon thread.

We have seen the confusion this causes already by others stating they seem to be seeing so many Mormon threads whe they are clearly not if you actually read the comments written by the thread starters.

Just a thought.

In before the usual claims that I am whining when I am not....

[Jack Hydrazine]

I don’t see how this thread belongs on FR. Explain.

[Paragon Defender]

It’s in the religion section. These types of threads are posted by obsessed anti-Mormons. There are tons of these types of threads on here. You will surely see many of their gang chime in.

[Colofornian]

What’s the point of this thread?

#1...When you ask many Mormons -- sometimes Mormon FREEPERS...other times Mormon missionaries...other times grassroots Mormons...whether they believe in one God...

They'll say things like "We pray to one god" or "We worship one god" or "We believe in one Godhead"...

It's only when you go inside the veneer -- into what Mormon leaders are telling their flock -- you see that they do indeed embrace many gods.

Hence, the Mormon's claim to be "Christianity" quickly evaporates away with this claim of multiple gods.

#2 we also get a glimpse here of how controlling the Mormon church -- not even allowing many faithful older teen adults & adults in their 20s to NOT allow them to see their siblings get married in their temples!

[ejonesie22]

If you have to make it a point you are not whining...

[Religion Moderator]

Most of the complaints are due to the fact that the "everything" browse includes the Religion Forum along with News/Activism, etc.

Pass the word:

If you do not wish to see Religion Forum posts, do NOT use the "everything" option on the browse. Instead, browse by "News/Activism." When you log back in, the browse will reset to "everything" - so be sure to set it back to "News/Activism."

[Colofornian]

I really think the anti-Mormon threads should have to use an Anti-Mormon tag or something of the like.

I have Mormon family/relatives who I love. (That makes me pro-Mormon). I delineated this in a thread -- see Why I Love Mormons, but not Mormonism

[But I do concede I am against MormonISM...]

But I understand, PD, your need to control...it's a typical Mormon leader's penchant...to want to control who loves who...who's "pro" this and who's "anti" that...

We have seen the confusion this causes already by others stating they seem to be seeing so many Mormon threads whe they are clearly not if you actually read the comments written by the thread starters.

So, IOW, Mormon messages by Mormon leaders are not intended for broader conservative audiences/readership?

Let's reverse the picture, for a moment, PD. Let's say some Mormons were posting articles written by Christians.

Let's say somebody was even to assign bad motive to these Mormons for doing that. Let's say some Mormons, motivated by envy, rivalry, lack of good will, insincerity, selfish ambition, and wanting to stir up trouble were posting threads written by Christians.

What would be the proper Christian response?

Well, fortunately, the apostle Paul already answered that for us. Let's review Philippians 1:

15 It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. 16 The latter do so out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. 18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.

You see, PD, the "motive" isn't even to matter. It didn't matter to Paul...He actually rejoiced over it!

Likewise, if ill-motivated Mormons posted Christian content (well, content that was truly "Christian"), I, too, would rejoice! I wouldn't complain. I wouldn't whine. Why should I? Isn't the true gospel being shared?

It is deceptive that they say (Mormon - Open) as that suggests that it is a Mormon thread.

Well, I'd be glad to add the "ism" if you think that would help in the future...make it Mormonism - Open...In fact, I think I will...always trying to be helpful, PD

One more thought, tho, PD: Do you see us Christians complaining to BYU-Idaho? I mean...when you look at their: BYU-Idaho Honor Code Statement for Employees -- what's the #1 reference you see right away?

1. Abide by the standards of Christian living taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This includes graciousness and consideration for others and the observance of high principles of honor, integrity, and morality.

Now, do we Christians make an appeal to the person in charge of this BYU-Idaho employee honor code to change the word "Christian" to "Mormon" so as not to confuse the world that the employees there are indeed Mormon -- and Mormon only??? And that Christian employee candidates are actually snubbed & turned down from employment at places like BYU-Idaho?

I mean wouldn't that avoid confusion of a similar nature that you're trying to claim? (And wouldn't that be even more important?)

Now that you realize this "confusing reality" at BYU-Idaho, are you going to contact them & suggest to them distinct wording so that there's less "confusion" about the distinctions you're trying to raise? Just a thought.

[Colofornian]

I really think the anti-Mormon threads should have to use an Anti-Mormon tag...

BTW, my reference to Phillippians 1 in the last post also applies to that wannabe Mormon "apologist" who unscientifically tries to count what % of FR Lds threads are "anti" Mormon, "pro" Mormon or neutral.

According to the apostle Paul's take on Phil. 1:15-18, if the Mormon "gospel" was the true gospel, it wouldn't matter who posted what Lds thread. As long as it was posting a Mormon "gospel" source and Mormon leader content, why if Paul was a "Mormon" he'd rejoice.

But leave it to you and other wannabe Mormon "apologists." You don't think Biblically.

Even your...
...official Mormon authors...
...from official Mormon sources...
...are rated by you & other wannabe Mormon "apologists"...
...as "anti-Mormon"...

That's actually getting to be hilarious!

And if...
...Lds "Freepers" match the population correlation...
...IOW, if you & other Lds are 2% of the FREEPER population -- just like Lds are 2% of the overall population...
...Then if you & other Lds are seeding over 20% of the Lds threads here...

So please answer this simple question:

Why are you and other Lds FREEPERS posting 10 times the number of Lds threads as would be expected by your population ratio?

By all means, post all you want, PD; it is a Free Republic.

It just seems so strange to me that people who get paranoid about what % of Lds threads are deemed "pro"-Mormon seem to reveal a pretty greedy spirit!

C'mon, PD...do the math: Here Lds are already apparently nabbing over 10 times more "pro"-Mormon threads than their population numbers would indicate...and all they've done since the New Year began is to complain about that to their hosts!

I mean what do you want?
Do you want 20 times the 2% of Mormons so that you double the amount of Mormon proselytization on FR?
Do you want 30 times the 2% of Mormons so that you triple the amount of Mormon proselytization on FR?
Do you want 40 times the 2% of Mormons so that you can quadruple the amount of Mormon proselytization on FR?
Or do you want to just go for a "no-hitter?" IOW, do you want from FR & the rest of us...an open-season proselytization-interference-free zone where no Mormon teaching or Mormon "scripture" will ever be challenged?

Do you & other wannabe Lds "apologists" unscientifically track the % of Lds missionary conversations that mention the "Great apostasy" or the "universal apostasy" that describes all of us Christians as "apostates?" And how many of those conversations present Christians in a positive manner? 1%? 1/2%? .0001%? NONE?

Would you advocate I follow an Lds Mormon missionary team; and as they leave each house where they encountered contacts, that I go knocking on that same house to survey what they said about Christians?...And whether & what % of those convos were "positive" mentions about Christians?

And then if I find out that under a quarter of those conversations were less than positive mentions about Christians, do you suggest I go the wannabe Lds "apologist" route & throw a hissy fit about the need for a Christian anti-defamation league vs. Mormon missionaries because they didn't reach their "quota" of positive mentions about Christians?

Several BYU-Idaho & BYU-Provo courses center around Christian denominations & Christianity pre-19th century. What % of those have positive or "pro" mentions by Mormon professors about Christians & Christianity?

What? You mean you & other wannabe Lds "apologists" haven't bothered to track that unscientific data?

What about Official Lds articles & books & curricula that center around Christian denominations & Christianity pre-19th century & the like?...
What % of those have positive or pro- mentions of Christians?
What? No unscientific data for y'all to report to us there?

Why not? I thought Lds was all about being "FAIR." Isn't that what you name one of your apologists orgs? Isn't that what you claim baptism for the dead accomplishes? Where's your sense of measuring "fairness" here? Why so lopsided an application?

PD...this Mormon obsession with "positive Mormon PR" is getting rather unbalanced!!!

[Godzilla]

More whining from a mormon apologist