Posted on 02/15/2012 5:09:18 AM PST by Colofornian
Pat Waldron asserts that Mormons are Christians and offers these reasons: First, Mormons call themselves "The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints." Second, Mormon temples contain pictures of Jesus. Third, the Mormon choir will "bring tears to your eyes, if you are a Christian." And, fourth, Mormons are nice people. But these "reasons" are hardly convincing because they deal only with superficial appearances.
A more robust analysis reveals that Mormons reject absolutely essential Biblical beliefs that Christians have held for centuries. First, Mormons reject the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Christians believe that there is one God and only one God, and that he exists eternally as three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who are each equally and fully God.
Second, related to the first, Mormons reject the Christian belief that Jesus is uncreated and eternal. In contrast, Mormons assert that Jesus is a created being. The official Mormon website states that Jesus "was the first spirit to be created."
Third, Mormons reject the Christian belief that there is only one god. In contrast, the official Mormon website states "Mormons do teach there are three Gods." Mormons believe in three gods. Christians are monotheists.
In summary, Mormons reject three essential Christian doctrines firmly held by Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox Christians. We would do well to follow the words of Jesus when he said, "Stop judging by mere appearances and make a right judgment."
Go ye into all the world....
And, even if we HAD no MORMONs; we'd still have ME!
God didn’t say there were other gods. It has already been thoroughly explained to you that context matters. You have negated the context of the verses you quoted to arrive at a meaning that is very different from the original author.
Jews and Christians have universally interpreted the Old Testament as teaching God is monotheistic long before the mormon cult ever arrived. There will always be trouble makers like you that will pick a couple verses from the Bible, ignore the context of those passages, and render a completely distorted view. That is how false teachers work. They take the Truth and distort it to fit their faulty reasoning.
“God didn’t say there were other gods”
Yes he did.
1st commandment.
Direct quote.
Spin it all you want.
I just hope you don’t burn in hell for spinning your false beliefs.
bttt
LOL
There is no spin in the interepretation of the Old Testament that is accepted by all of Christianity and Judiasm. It’s called using the CONTEXT in order to determine the meaning.
You’re concerned that my believing that God is monotheistic will send me to Hell???!!!! So, you’re saying that God(s) will send me to Hell because I don’t believe that (they) are really more than one God???!!! Your delusion knows no bounds.
You have no reading comprehension skills or ability to interpret the Bible and now you want to throw this garbage around. Clearly, you’re trolling...I regret wasting any time conversing with you.
King Philippe III is the fellow who started it off. When his father, Philippe II died in 1598 (along with a number of other European notables) that opened up the Americas to smart young people with advanced thinking ~ so Philippe III and his friends came up with the Treaty of London (1604) which crammed down the idea of American settlement according to an Hapsburg or Spanish division of the territory.
He gave his cousin James an area called Acadia. He gave his other cousin, the King of France, Canada. He then carved out a colony called Carolana (now North and South Carolina) ~ probably because they'd discovered gold there.
The rest, West of the Alleghenies was identified for future settlement as time, circumstance and energy would allow, and the part East of the Alleghenies was an experiment where Protestants from Europe, except "the Dutch", could settle.
Virginia was not all that big ~ it encompassed everything we now call Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Downstate New York, Long Island, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia and West Virginia.
By the standards of the time that was huge though.
Over the next couple of centuries Spain weakened, France weakened, England strengthened, and the custom of Protestants going to America to settle continued.
We date our family's arrival to as early as 1502 ~ with various other individuals coming here over the 1500s to work as surveyors, researchers, or just adventurers ~ one of their cousins was a noted Catholic dissenter in Spain who advocated opening the American missions up to all the various orders and brotherhoods and not just to one group of priests (as had been the case). Schism was avoided when even King Philippe II saw the wisdom of that action and convinced the Popes to go along with it (they still having civil authority over each and every priest in every order).
By 1598, as the news of the death of Philippe and Elizabeth spread there was an aggressive rush to carve chunks out of the Americas and tens of thousands of Europeans began history's greatest landrush.
By 1621 there were actually places with names around here, but it wasn't until the 1670s that it became necessary once again to be concerned with whether or not someone was Catholic or Protestant. Implicit in the Peace of Westphalia (which ended the Thirty Years War) was the concept of "the national church", so the freewheeling Americans were reined in. Charles II took the English throne as a quite tamed monarch.
In brief, Our America began as a Protestant "geto" protected by the Catholic King of Spain ~ which is something we've forgotten about. He was one of history's good guys and he loved to party hearty!
That is very interesting! Thank you! I have read that the individual, Squanto, who kept the Pilgrims from starving to death (half of them already gone) knew the "invaders'" language, because he had been to Europe. I had never learned that back in public school. And, of course, the Jamestown settlers must have been largely Protestants? And, also, I left out the Hugenots (when?) down at St. Augustine --
There are 30 other KNOWN early settlement archaeological sites on the East Coast that have not yet been examined.
There are a number of suspected Spanish settlements from the early 1500s as well ~ but they weren't as well developed so there's not a lot of debris to work with.
A new site is in Long Island where the Shinnecock Indian Nation has a small reservation. A plant grows there called CLOUD BERRY. The particular subspecies grows only in Scandinavia.
Otherwise the Cloud Berry doesn't live in the lower 48!
So, why? Obviously it was partially domesticated before it's arrival here ~ probably planted by SOMEBODY in an early time. No doubt the Shinnecock will get someone in there to make some archaeological hay out of that plant.
At the moment I have my eye on about 25 probable 1500s Spanish sites (mining or fur trade) in the Midwest EAST of the Mississippi.
No one has looked at these places ~ one of them even seems to have been one of those "La Villa Real" places, just like St. Louis, Santa Fe, etc.
NOTE, for Spain there were two kinds of Dutch. Good Catholics ~ living in what is now Belgium and Southern Netherlands. Bad Protestants - living in what is now Northern Netherlands (Holland).
During the very earliest periods of exploration and settlement in the New World the Spanish were accompanied by Dutch! The New York settlement of 1621 was just the latest in a number of Dutch trading villages set up all over the America. We lose site of that because we don't read Spanish history! Instead, we read English history.
Any gold tablets found up around Palmyra region, brought in by adventurers?
Don't know about insecure, but jealous, yes; at least, He says so --
If there were I’m not telling anybody. Rich gold hunters never tell.
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.