Tehran has summoned the French Ambassador for the offensive representation of Jesus Christ during the Olympics

X ^

[RandFan]

@Megatron_ron

BREAKING:

Iran has summoned the French ambassador for the offensive representation of Jesus Christ during the Olympics opening ceremony.

Muslims consider Jesus a prophet of God.

@Megatron_ron

Iranian Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance:

'The insulting representation of Jesus Christ in Paris yesterday was completely offensive and crossed all red lines. France, a country with a major history of Christianity, must be ashamed of itself, and I implore our Christian people all over the world to speak out against this act – we resolutely condemn this'

[ifinnegan]

Yes. That was the difference.

[230FMJ]

Kind of ironic that an objection to the mockery of Jesus comes from Tehran but not the Vatican.

[wita]

When you are reduced to printing man made falsehoods in search of a reaction you show yourself to have little credibility other than with those you are wishing to impress.

It literally begins with the first bullet point and continues. For example Joseph Smith did not claim to start a new religion nor create his own scripture. After all he was as the paragraph stated truthfully, at the time relatively uneducated.

I speak only for Joseph not for the other individual being compared to Joseph.

Same problems with bullet point 2. I quote: Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. Joseph was told no such thing. Their creeds were an abomination and their professors were all corrupt. The visitation by God the Father and Son Jesus Christ made no mention of scripture and answered the question he asked of them with the following answer:

18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven.

And the falsehoods continue. Josephs word against the “world” when the truth is plain as day. Now if all Christianity was united in their doctrine belief and interpretation of scripture maybe we would be having a different conversation. Alas...it appears there will remain a large unbridgeable gulf.

[Elsie]

When you are reduced to printing man made falsehoods in search of a reaction you show yourself to have little credibility other than with those you are wishing to impress.

 

 

 

 Both founded new religions by creating their own scriptures. 

It literally begins with the first bullet point and continues. For example Joseph Smith did not claim to start a new religion nor create his own scripture.  I speak only for Joseph not for the other individual being compared to Joseph. 

As one can plainly see, the first bullet point was NOT a quote from JS, but an accurate picture of what History has passed down to us. 

---

 In like manner, Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. 

Same problems with bullet point 2. I quote: Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. Joseph was told no such thing. 

So, JS just came up with this on his own?

---

And the falsehoods continue. 

Show them.

 

 

[wita]

Show them.

I have already, and as usual even a direct quote appears to be inadequate.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

I guess personage didn’t carry enough weight. Much less the doctrinal equality of the Book of Mormon with the Holy Bible.

[Elsie]

... and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight...

Really; didn't he know who it was?

He didn't try to make an identification first??

 

 

 

 

 1 John 4:1 
  Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God. For many false prophets have gone out into the world.

 

 

 

 

Joseph Smith taught his followers to...

 

 

Doctrine and Covenants       

Section 129:1-9

 

Instructions given by Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, 9 February 1843, making known three grand keys by which the correct nature of ministering angels and spirits may be distinguished (see History of the Church, 5:267).

1–3, There are both resurrected and spirit bodies in heaven; 4–9, Keys are given whereby messengers from beyond the veil may be identified.

      

Joseph Smith

1 There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones; 2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory. 4 When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you. 5 If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand. 6 If he be the spirit of a just man made perfect he will come in his glory; for that is the only way he can appear; 7 Ask him to shake hands with you, but he will not move, because it is contrary to the order of heaven for a just man to deceive; but he will still deliver his message. 8 If it be the devil as an angel of light, when you ask him to shake hands he will offer you his hand, and you will not feel anything; you may therefore detect him. 9 These are three grand keys whereby you may know whether any administration is from God.

 

The only problem I have with this 'test', is that I cannot find ANY instance of it EVER being used!

 

[wita]

Some folks are so dense they are unable to “see” the forest for the trees.

God is not a liar and thus cannot deceive nor the Son who is like the Father.

Joseph on their appearance was immediately delivered from the darkness and evil that held him bound.

Joseph also noted their brightness and glory defied all description.

An angel of light cannot replicate the glory of God. Moses easily recognized the difference when tempted of the devil, exclaiming “where is thy glory, that I should worship thee?”

Joseph was called by name, and told to listen to “My Beloved Son”.

Joseph had no difficulty knowing with whom he was speaking.

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

[Elsie]

 

1. God is not a liar and thus cannot deceive nor the Son who is like the Father.   Satan is - and is the Father of lies.

2. Joseph on their appearance was immediately delivered from the darkness and evil that held him bound.   If Satan puts it on you, he can surely take it off.

3. Joseph also noted their brightness and glory defied all description.   And yet artists have taken liberties with trying to illustrate it.

4. An angel of light cannot replicate the glory of God. Moses easily recognized the difference when tempted of the devil, exclaiming “where is thy glory, that I should worship thee?”   True, but since JS had never SEEN the goG he was easily fooled.  I know about Moses, and JS sure was no Moses!

5. Joseph was called by name, and told to listen to “My Beloved Son”.  

6. Joseph had no difficulty knowing with whom he was speaking.    SO?  (Refer to #1)  If JS knew - then why the cryptic language?

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

---

Some folks are so dense they are unable to “see” the forest for the trees.

[wita]

Satan is - and is the Father of lies.

...and that has exactly what to do with the appearance of the Savior and his father to Joseph Smith?

If Satan puts it on you, he can surely take it off.

That comment makes even less sense than the first one.

And yet artists have taken liberties with trying to illustrate it.

Artists aren’t in the business of portraying Godly glory.

Speaking of things that don’t make sense.

True, but since JS had never SEEN the goG he was easily fooled.

TWO personages that appeared to Joseph in what he perceived as Godly glory, stated their case and followed it up with appropriate visits and education plus the restoration of the early Church and close to two hundred years of successful progress, three additional scriptures that at the very minimum prove the validity of the Holy Bible, and all you can come up with is Joseph is easily fooled. Pardon me but that is truly laughable.

SO? (Refer to #1) If JS knew - then why the cryptic language?

So, why ask me? Oh, Joseph isn’t around. That leaves you with only one source for an answer, unless you value man’s interpretation of Joseph to God’s.

[Elsie]

That leaves you with only one source for an answer, unless you value man’s interpretation of Joseph to God’s.

That leaves you with only one source for an answer.

You value Josephs interpretation of the missing Book of Mormon to God’s revealed word in the bible.

[wita]

You value Josephs interpretation of the missing Book of Mormon to God’s revealed word in the bible.

There is no missing Book of Mormon and I find not one difference in what I read in the Bible vs what I read in the Book of Mormon.

Anyone that says different isn’t reading, or has an agenda that is able to ignore the word of God.

[Elsie]

I find not one difference in what I read in the Bible vs what I read in the Book of Mormon.

Well, considering so much is lifted from the KJV anyway...

 

But, to be accurate, there's a LOT different from the book that serves up MOST LDS theology: The Doctrines & Covenants - added stuff that somehow GOD forgot to place in the BoM when it was written in Reformed Egyptian.

[Elsie]

There is no missing Book of Mormon

Strange.

I must have overlooked it when I toured the grounds of LDS, Inc. in Salt Lake City.

Is it on display like our USA founding documents are??

[wita]

Oh I get it, “the missing Book of Mormon”.

You mean the plates. Words and witnesses just aren’t enough.

It’s missing because much of it is yet to be revealed, besides the fact that there are so many perhaps like you that need a sign. The words are unrecognizable as coming from the same mouth as the Bible. Instead of recognition there is fill in the blank.

[Elsie]

The words are unrecognizable ...

It appears you are correct.

 

The Testimony of Eight Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Christian Whitmer

Jacob Whitmer

Peter Whitmer, Jun.

John Whitmer

Hiram Page

Joseph Smith, Sen.

Hyrum Smith

Samuel H. Smith

 

 

Testimony of Eight Witnesses (churchofjesuschrist.org)

 

---

---

 

The "Caractors" are the only tangible evidence in existence related to Smith's story.

No gold plates, no brass plates, no peep stones, no Urim and Thummim...

only these "Caractors," not a single one of which is in the purported languages.

---

Smith's translation of the Caractors. According to Martin Harris (Joseph Smith - History, 1:64), "I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated,* and he said they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters."

Speak right up now in all truthfulness. Isn't it revealing how Smith started out making a stab at creating believable "caractors" but quckly gave up and produced nothing but squiggles, ending up with a series of nothing more than crude little scribbles? Yet Professor Anthon supposedly translated them!

---

*Harris must have had two or three pieces of paper with him—one with characters and a translation of them (on the same paper or a separate one) and one with untranslated characters—quite likely the "Caractors." Some Mormon "scholars" have gone out on a limb, sawed it off, and knocked themselves out trying to translate from these true Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic characters a segment that would correspond with a verse from 1 Nephi.

---

Modern-day experts in Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic. In 1829, any knowledge of these languages possessed by U.S. scholars would have been rudimentary at best. Expertise in them has vastly improved since then. So go ahead, do it. Get any modern expert in these languages to identify which of these "Caractors" are Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac and Arabic. Better still, accept the claim of Mormon apologists that Anthon did indeed so testify and that his appraisal of the Caractors was correct. (Op. cit, pp. 73-75)

Save your money! Samples of Assyriac/Aramaic and Arabic writing:

What say you? Which of Smith's "Caractors" resemble the Assyriac and Arabic ones? No need to pay experts for their analysis. A child could accurately check this out. These writing systems have remained constant for well over 3000 years.

[Elsie]

Words and witnesses just aren’t enough.

Evidently not...

---

As Paul Harvey would say, "The REST of the story.

---

 

The following are the LYING images that MORMONism has produced, KNOWING that they represent something FALSE!!

 

 

 

 

---

---

"Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters. Then he would tell the writer and he would write it. Then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on. But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous. Thus was the hol [whole] translated."

---Joseph Knight's journal.

---

"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."
(History of the RLDS Church, 8 vols.

(Independence, Missouri: Herald House,1951),

"Last Testimony of Sister Emma [Smith Bidamon]," 3:356.

---

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
---(David Whitmer,

as published in the "Kansas City Journal," June 5, 1881,

and reprinted in the RLDS "Journal of History", vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.

---

In an 1885 interview, Zenas H. Gurley, then the editor of the RLDS Saints Herald, asked Whitmer if Joseph had used his "Peep stone" to do the translation. Whitmer replied:

"... he used a stone called a "Seers stone," the "Interpreters" having been taken away from him because of transgression. The "Interpreters" were taken from Joseph after he allowed Martin Harris to carry away the 116 pages of Ms [manuscript] of the Book of Mormon as a punishment, but he was allowed to go on and translate by use of a "Seers stone" which he had, and which he placed in a hat into which he buried his face, stating to me and others that the original character appeared upon parchment and under it the translation in English."

---

"Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone, Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin and when finished he would say 'Written,' and if correctly written that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used."
(Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses,"

reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881

in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87.)

---

In 1879, Michael Morse, Emma Smith's brother-in-law, stated:

 

 "When Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon [I] had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation. The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribes Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other wrote it down."
(W.W. Blair interview with Michael Morse,

Saints Herald, vol. 26, no. 12

June 15, 1879,  pp. 190-91.)

---

Joseph Smith's brother William also testified to the "face in the hat" version:

 

"The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God"

("A New Witness for Christ in America,"

Francis W. Kirkham, 2:417.)

---

"The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret was the same manner as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, while the book of plates were at the same time hid in the woods."

---Isaac Hale (Emma Smith's father's) affidavit, 1834.

---

---

[Elsie]

...much of it is yet to be revealed...

Really?

It appears that 'the most correct book' is missing a bit of info.

---

On November 28, 1841, the Prophet Joseph Smith met with the Nauvoo City Council and members of the Quorum of the Twelve in the home of President Brigham Young. 

 

History of the Church records that he conversed “with them upon a variety of subjects.

Brother Joseph Fielding was present, having been absent four years on a mission to England.”[1]

 It was in that setting, at the Sunday city council meeting in the Young’s residence, that Joseph Smith made what has come to be one of the most axiomatic and memorable statements in Mormon literature:

 “I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”[2] 

[Elsie]

could you delete this?

I double posted it

[wita]

How you do go on!

Got any Prophets or Apostles to back up what you gather from puny man as “Evidence” that Joseph Smith wasn’t called of God to restore the “Church” in the latter days?

It’s all going to look pretty shaky at the Judgement Bar.

For example who exactly told you that Prophets and Apostle were no longer necessary in the Lord’s scheme of things? Is he or she a more convincing mouth piece than prophets who have gone before? I can’t wait to hear just whom I should be listening to.

There is more but for now that should be sufficient.