Posted on 03/09/2011 2:58:23 PM PST by Paragon Defender
old and tired
It is not old and tired if you have yet to address it. :-)
It is addressed at the links.
There you go again. I want an answer from you. Yourself. Not your tired old list of links. You keep failing to give one. It just must be too hard for you to answer.
Do you really want it? Are you just wanting to play an argumentative game?
Yes I want it. And it is you who are playing games. Why can't you just give me an answer? Your same old list of links is NOT an answer. I vote that you totally FAIL. Again.
Isn’t that the point of Mormonism? Becoming a god someday?
I wonder if PD has worked on his godly moves.... i.e., parting the bath water or turning a water into grape juice...
If J. Smith is a false prophet Mormonism is a lie.
You are correct! We agree on something. But he wasn’t a false prophet.
It is not old and tired if you have yet to address it.
Old and tired is the regurgitated propaganda “issues” that have been addressed repeatedly and sufficiently. All there for anyone who wants to see.
You keep failing to give one.
No, I keep giving it to you and you keep failing to take it. =-)
Yes I want it.
Prove it. Not to me. To God and yourself.
NAH...the mormons have already turned Jesus' sacramental wine into water, and "14 Behold, I, the Lord, in the beginning blessed the waters; but in the last days, by the mouth of my servant John, I cursed the waters." Doctrine and Covenants 61:14 so parting the bath water would be dangerous 'cause Satan has dominion over the waters!!
Apparently, he has dominion over peep stones too!
So.... giving false prophecies (e.g. Smith's claim that the secong coming would be in 1891) doesn't doesn't make one a false prophet? Wow. lol
that have been addressed repeatedly and sufficiently
You are wrong here. You have never addressed this issue. I am still waiting. :-)
No, I keep giving it to you
You do not. Your tired old list of links is NOT an answer.
Prove it.
The burden of proof is not on me FRiend. It is on you.
Good one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oPcYtfAg18&playnext=1&list=PL0B681156BA0B6F68
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ4O1lRLWxU&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IONy8MBHWpg&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
But he wasn’t a false prophet.
So.... giving false prophecies (e.g. Smith’s claim that the secong coming would be in 1891) doesn’t doesn’t make one a false prophet? Wow. lol
that have been addressed repeatedly and sufficiently
You are wrong here. You have never addressed this issue. I am still waiting. :-)
No, I keep giving it to you
You do not. Your tired old list of links is NOT an answer.
Prove it.
The burden of proof is not on me FRiend. It is on you.
So you continue to prove that you truly don’t want the answer.
All of the anti-Mormon propaganda here is covered including this specific old and tired subject. It’s right there. Do you want it? Prove that you want it. Put forth a tiny little effort.
I sure would like to see the source for this claim.
Critics of the Church use this incident and other similar ones in an effort to undermine the confidence and faith of those who believe Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God. They argue that if even a prophet might not be able to distinguish between true and false revelations, the value or usefulness of revelation as a means of showing us God's will would always be hopelessly questionable. Those who are troubled by the lesson learned through the "Canadian copyright incident" (that even real prophets must distinguish between revelations of God, revelations of the devil, and revelations of the self; that even real prophets can be mistaken in making this distinction; that the manner of distinguishing between true and false revelations, even for prophets, is not an automatic, mechanical process) operate under the underlying assumption that true prophets of God receive revelation in a manner similar to how a fax machine receives a transmission over a phone line. This assumption, whether conscious or subconscious, also demands that a prophet be a mere vessel or conduit for divine communication, with pure revelation being transmitted perfectly through the prophet, but with the prophet's mortality and infirmities (assumptions, background, experience, biases, prejudices, wishes, tendencies, etc.) playing no role in the reception and articulation of the revelation.
As both Joseph Smith's explanation for the failure of the Toronto revelation and his statement that "a prophet is a prophet only when . . . acting as such" attest, true prophets can be wrong at times and yet still be true prophets, since they are only prophets when they are speaking with the authority of the Holy Ghost. There are therefore times when prophets speak as men, and not prophets, and the great responsibility to determine when they speak as prophets rests upon those who hear them. Authorized prophets and apostles have uniformly and consistently exhorted Church members to seek and strive for confirming revelation from God regarding what Church leaders teach them as security against the fallibility and mortality of Church leaders. In expounding on this topic, Church leaders are clear that even Church leaders could potentially lead people astray, and they explained how God would preserve and protect the Church from this possibility. The bottom line is that, despite what some individual Mormons may think, Church leaders have consistently rejected the assumption that true prophets are inerrant, infallible, and always completely, absolutely reliable, thus absolving individuals from the responsibility of proving their words.
So, it appears to me that the LDS prophets are not under anywhere near the sanctions that those from the Holy Bible are when it pertains to speaking for the Lord. We know that Almighty God himself said that if any person claimed to speak for him and what they prophesied did not happen as it was said to, the person was a false prophet and was to be executed. Good thing for modern-day LDS prophets that God "changed" his mind about such things. (/sarc)
However, Joseph Srnith did make several interesting statements about seeing the Savior. One of them is a favorite of our detractors. They have misquoted it, misreported it, misinterpreted it and misexplained it. Most often they simply do not complete the quote, making it appear that the prophet said something he didn't.
The passage in questions is found in Section 130 of the Doctrine and Covenants. It is reported in abbreviated form, and Joseph acknowledged as he recorded it that he didn't understand the meaning or intent of the revelation. Joseph Smith recorded:
I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following: Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter. (D&C 130:14-15).
Many of our detractors end the quote at this point, and then they assume that the statement is a prophecy that the Savior would come in the year 1890 or 1891, since the prophet Joseph was born in 1805. However, if the reader will continue further in that passage, he will see that Joseph Smith himself stated:
I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face (D & C 130:16).
We only learn what the prophet did prophesy by reading verse 17: "I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time." Without a doubt, that prophecy came true. The Lord did not return to the earth for His Second Coming before that time.
But there are other aspects of fulfillment that should also be considered. We do not know when it was that the Prophet earnestly prayed to know the time of the Lord's coming. The context, (verse 13), shows that it may have taken place in 1832 or earlier. At least twice, as is recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, Joseph saw the face of the Son of Man. D&C 76:20-24 and D&C 110:2-10 both record appearances of the Lord Jesus Christ, either of which may constitute fulfillment of the Lord's prophetic promise. He may also have seen the Lord's face at the time of his death in 1844, as he pondered in D&C 130:16.
This is when the falseness of the Mormon religion really hit me like a brick. Jesus is a stepping stone to them, a means to an end.
You use Him to get what you want and then move on.
Or, equally as appalling, you don't do a very good job and go to a lesser heaven in which you will never see him.
Don't they get it? Jesus IS heaven. There can be no heaven without Him. And the whole point of our lives is to be with him and worship Him forever.
Wouldn't it be a relief to be a Mormon and realize this? All the endless doing and striving - you can just lay it down and walk away. It has already been done for you. You can rest in Him! LDS people, please don't turn away from this incredible gift!
You know, I always wonder why, if the bible was such a mess, God did not submit changes in this great "restoration", during this "fullness of times", this wonderful "dispensation".
That would have cleared things up enormously.
You keep proving that you can’t answer for yourself. Epic fail. Again.
Lol. I thought it might be as such. So mormons have pretty lax standards concerning their prophets. How do they tell for sure what it true and what is not? And who wants to follow a leader who speaks falsely half the time and can easily mislead you?
Lol. It is so funny how they provide in the text multiple ways that it might be interepreted so that the prophecy can easily be claimed to have been fulfilled.
13 It may probably arise through the slave question. This a voice declared to me, while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 25th, 1832.
14 I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following:
15 Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.
16 I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face.
17 I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.
This is the text.
I don't know if this is the text that was being referred to as my question was never answered .
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.