Replies

See, right there you assert some thing that is not so, it's credibility comes from God or not at all, If Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, it'd already be in the dustbin of history, but here we are discussing it still...

Using the standard of man to defend Joey? There are a lot of cults out there that continue to exist because there are people who are foolish/brain washed enough to follow them. There are people that still believe the earth is flat.

(you go on to slander a good man, but it's wasted breath because you premise is flawed, right along with your "facts" on Joseph Smith. I hope men are kinder to your memory then you have been to Joseph's

Just because you wish my premise to be flawed doesn’t make it so. I can / have documented every portion of my claims in the past here. Poor Joey, the voice of history isn’t kind – only truthful.

Actually, i got the Context, thanks, and it's exactly what I mean, God will continue to come to us with his word, not stop inexplicably to do what he has done for all time and close his mouth and not speak nor reveal his truth. The bible has unfulfilled prophecies that speak of prophets... which means there should still be some.

Pending prophecies does not equal mormonic continued revelation – particularly that which contradicts the existing revelation. As you have been unable to prove in the past, there is nothing in mormonism that isn’t superior to revelations by JW’s, Scientology, Islam, etc. except a blind faith in Joseph Smith.

Yeah, it is agreed by Scholars that this addition to the Bible gives one of the places that was used in the defining the Doctrine of the trinity that God and Jesus are the same being, it's a typo? (or copy'o) Yeah the Clintonian that's old news, we've known about that major flaw in the Bible for longer than you've been alive, so it's still inerrant. LOL!

Nor does 4000+ changes to the bom? LOL. At least we can justify the identification of additions such as the Johnnane comma. How can you justify those changes to the most correct book on the planet.

Like the changes tot eh bible, Addition of verses, chapters foot notes and spelling corrections? yes the Book of Mormon has had similar changes, then there are the corrections Joseph made to the manuscripts, which the printer ignored, and the word white which was changed to pure because usage has changed, is that all you've got?

There are two handwritten MS in existence. Mormons admit that only a fraction of the changes are attributed to typesetting errors. Mormon historians have described the translation process being word for word. So grammar and spelling changes are questionable – unless your god has trouble spelling. However, significant changes outside of those documents have been made heres one of many:

2 Nephi 30:6 (1840 edition) — … and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a ~~white~~ pure and a delightsome people.
(Later editions until 1981) … white and delightsome
(1981 to current edition) pure and delightsome

Before 1978 dark-skinned males were not allowed to hold positions of priesthood authority within the Mormon church. Today Mormon scriptures continue to teach that dark skin is a curse from God and a sign of His displeasure (See 1 Nephi 12:23; 2 Nephi 5:21; Alma 3:6). Brigham Young, second president and prophet of the LDS church referred to those with dark skin as being "cursed with a s[k]in of blackness" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 272). Christians can go back to extant ms, mormons go back to ???????? to justify these changes since it was the most correct.

First, you are the ones saying the Bible is complete an inerrant, since there are so many versions it's only logical to ask which one is since they disagree with each other sometimes.

Unable to tell the difference between translation – which are no inerrant, hmmmm? Most churches / denominations make the reference to inerrancy to the original ms. That is why scholars go the greek/Hebrew text. The bom has been changed thousands of times WITHOUT being able to refer back to the plates.

As to the JST, Emma retained ownership of the manuscript, and gave it to what is now the community of Christ Church, they won't give or sell the rights, so we are stuck with excerpts which are in the KJV as printed by the LDS church.

That is a cop-out. It is the perfected work of Smith and if it is the word of God, you are violating it on something this trivial? Because you cannot copywrite something means you cannot canonize it?

The Book of Enoch uncovered in the dead sea scrolls was not complete, that is true, so? many of the books of scripture recovered are not complete, until parts of the Book of Enoch were found there these same "Scholars" were insisting that the whole thing was written later, they were wrong.

You are ignorant of what was found at dss site. Look at your own statement – parts – not the whole, and those parts missing. All portions of 1 Enoch were found with the exception of Similitudes. And if you were not so context challenged – I said that those who have studied and translated the Similitudes portion indicate it was not written until after Christ, not the whole document, some as late as 2d century AD. The earliest version of Similitudes is IIRC 1400 AD.

As to Enoch being considered scripture, so Jesus Quoted from it, the apostles quoted from it, all of Christendom used it until it was not Canonized in Jamnia and even then it's use took hundreds of years to die out, we have it now largely because the Copts continued to use it into modern times (and still do) but hey one blanket quote from Godzilla and nope, it was never used by anybody (the evidence disagrees with you, so who to believe, you or my lying eyes...)

Your lying eyes. The Copts include it, they are the exception. Jesus didn’t quote from an unwritten document – he was citing Daniel. It (Enoch) was never counted as part of the Jewish canon and Jamnia only confirmed what was believed. Read a little FF Bruce regarding what the Jews considered canon and the difference from other works like the pseudographical 1 Enoch. If you had bothered to read – or do deeper research – you would see that this was not a blanket statement. Surprising since you are such an expert at that.

You are right about one thing, it's not a problem for us, we know how to recognize truth.

But lds inc. has not canonized it, right….

In case you were not paying attention, in the post I was responding to, I was specifically called out as one who disrespect the Bible. I hold the Bible in very high esteem, it is the word of God. I also recognize that it's not perfect. Others are insisting that it is, OK, let them back that assertion up when they attack me for not agreeing with them.

Not from what you have posted here on this thread. Oh the Johanne comma, bla bla.

Your time scale is not God's time scale, the falling away happened the the Son of perdition would be revealed, that does not mean immediately. Jesus died that all might be saved, that does not mean immediately, some of us are still down here screwing up (I mean me, no attack should be inferred here).

The scripture cited tells of a falling awayand the revelation of the son of perdition. Cannot have one without the other. He shall be revealed then in connection with the apostasy.

Please explain how this is a misapplication, really, I'd like to know what you think here.

I’ve told you numerous times – John was writing against Gnostic though trying to work its way into the church at that time.

LOL! Oh beautifully done, you stepped right into the center of the bear trap NONE OF WHAT YOU SAID IS TRUE. There are plenty of "Mystery" civilizations in the Americas, and there is plenty of evidence for (Do you really want me to list them Again?

Ohhhh, please don’t throw me in the briar patch! Mystery civilizations!!!!! Your are sooooo predictable and from the weekly world news fame, of mind if you want to continue to ruin your and the bom credibility go ahead. None of these mystery civilizations do not contain any thing that confirms the extensive, in the millions and millions, with large cities and temple, culture described in the bom. Even mormon archaeologists agree.

If I do you'll just claim the evidence is flawed and there fore there isn't any. or you'll fall back on "peer reviewed" and say anything not published by sources outside the churches is inadmissible (which is a ridiculous standard, let's apply it to say Christianity as a whole...)

. Christianity has archaeological support and doesn’t rely upon church funded hack sites. Archaeology from peer reviewed work is abundant to support biblical history. But then by your logic we should all believe that the earth is flat or the moon and sun are inhabited.

The DNA study that was so flawed the guys who actually did the research won't talk about it, only laymen who don't understand what was wrong do.

There have been multiple studies done, another was recently published. Add to that the other –pre dna studies that confirmed the mongoloid descent of the native Americans. They have no need to engage mormon skeptics. Mormon dna and anthropologist have left the mormonism in recent years because of the truth these studies have show – point to the make believe story that is the bom.

The Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,

this is sooooo laughable, and soooooo predictable. Here comes chiasmus being drug out again. Chiasmic patterns are present in Shakespear, Dr. Seuss and the bible (which is the most likely source since Smith copied so much of it). The book of Zelph probably even has chiasmus.

the Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters, (can you say reformed Egyptian which was a tough sell until other records started to show up that way...), then there's

Reformed Egyptian is still not recognized by real Egyptologists, and a posted article from Maxwell/FARMS. LOL real true scholarship.

The Paleo Hebrew written on a boulder in Los Lunas Arizona,

Keep writing, your credibility meter keeps falling. This website also has details of a visit by mormons investigators who told him it (the stone) didn’t support the bom or their research effort and left. Some resounding evidence DU. Further, the guy pushes a Phoenician origin, not Jewish, and contains Greek characters too.

The The Bat Creek stone with the ten commandments written in Hebrew,

Holy bat stone mormonman! Right, a single stone – linked to Masonic practices, upon which the whole of new world archaeology, mormon style is based.. Smithsonian Inst. does not recognize it as a nephite artifact either (was their dig). Where is the rest of the city? Where are the other overwhelming archaeological evidence that should be everywhere here?

there is the Discovery that if you follow the directions given in the Book of Mormon, you find all the unusual landmarks described in it for the middle east, including Naholm and Bountiful

Nibley didn’t agree with this route, nor does the story fit exactly either. They didn't find the name Nahom. They found NHM, which can be a number of things, depending on which vowels you choose to insert. The Mormons who discovered the markings decided it must be N-A-H-O-M because that's what they wanted to find. This is "reverse engineering." They looked until they found something vaguely like they wanted to find and declared it to be Bountiful, without any other corroborating research. Why is it they can find three letters in the desert but can't find entire cities, like Zarahemla after a century of looking? But then with the absence of all other evidences, the mormon faithful will grasp at any straw they can.

You will dismiss these one by one and insist that there is no evidence, of course not for there is no man so blind as those who will not see.

And I could provide evidence that the earth is flat, that would fit your definiton and use of evidence does not make it truth, especially if the interpretation of this evidence make it evidence for a much more plausible theory. But then too, mormon archaeologist have admitted there is no bom archaeology to begin with.

Actually, with the amount of effort that's been put into it you've come up with a surprisingly small amount of stuff. I mean the Treasure hunter stuff still gets play even though it's known to all come from the Salamander letter forged by Mark Hofmann, hey it says what you want it to say, keep using the discredited thing, make people point out that it was a forgery every time, challenge them to prove a negative, that's the ticket!

I’ve never cited Hofmann (although the living prophet and seer believed he was truthful – so much for supernatural insight huh. However the Tanners saw thru him and his frauds, hmmm who was more inspired). Smith’s treasure hunting is supported by plenty other documents – court documents. And IIRC, smith even discusses it in one of his early first vision accounts.

IMHO it's pathetic to pick on a man who was marytered for his faith, and make up stuff about him. pathetic.

He was murdered by a mob – true, he killed several of them during an escape attempt – hardly the lamb to the slaughter. He ordered the illegal destruction of a newspaper because it exposed his polygamy – so much for following the law of the land.

The Adam God theory was a Theory that was indeed talked about by Brigham young, I understand the theory, but it has never been the Doctrine of the church, so? It's not the only thing you guys misquote, come on the JOD is full of non cannoned theories by lots of prominent Mormons, you can do better then the AGT

Apart from Young’s inspired declaration that he never preached a sermon that should not be considered doctrine, which can easily be looked up, I’m sure that there are plenty of others who can show that other doctrines were linked to this one, particularly the old well loved phrase as man is God was and as God is man will become. However, his sermon was presented in total – how can you misquote an entire sermon. The teaching was clear within the sermon as it was in the extracted citations. But that was just one example. The other extracts on other subjects and speakers are shown to be clear as well.

I see nothing in the scriptures you quote about Satan answering a prayer to God.

And I’ve seen no statement in the scripture saying that Satan wouldn’t or couldn’t either. More broad brush misrepresentation we’ve all come to expect from you.

I suppose the Protestant were not too long ago Catholics and with the repudiation of some small differences could be again...

There were differences – yes. Different basic religion – no, we are both Christian.

But they are not now, nor are Mormons and the FLDS the same church, and you again don't look good claiming to be a man of God and bending the truth. God never lies, those who follow him shouldn't either.

So are you claiming mormonism never practiced and condoned polygamy? AFA LDS=FLDS, they are more like you than you are like Christianity theologically. I said what FLDS is today, LDS was about a century ago and LDS have not revoked Section 132 which officially sanctioned polygamy 100 yrs ago. What truth bending that?

So you would deny others the right to get an answer? Do you claim you can receive an answer for them? If you truly believe that they will receive a "NO" answer, then you should be saying fine, great, go read it, call us when God laughs when you ask if it's his, instead you guys get all stirred up and mad when I challenge people to read it, Why? The only logical reason is you are worried that people will get an answer and will know you have lied to them about us. (it's just logic...)

Man has free will – they can choose or not. I cannot reach out through my computer and stop them. But I also recognize that false prophets will go out and deceive many – that’s in the bible you know. If they have the full information – which mormons themselves admit they don’t provide – milk before meat – they can make an informed decision. I am comfortable knowing that it is less likely they will take mormonism literally after reading your nonsense.

Hence the discouragement of prayer...

Pot talking again? Where did I ever say not to pray in regards to making decisions……..don’t bother, you find it. What has been said, inspite of your twisting of our words is that study needs to be an important component – not superceded by feelings. No evidence of discouraging the Bereans from prayer either.

LOL, I think you have a Joseph Smith Fetish, i was thinking of Brigham young, but hey there are lots of dead guys to chose from and Anti's don't seem to be picky...

So you would discourage people from examining the claims of mormonism and its prophets? Are you saying that one is only allowed to believe the sanitized history of Joey– you would prevent them from doing that? If your posts indicate anything, it appears that you would not allow anything contrary BECAUSE he is dead. Tsk tsk DU, that is pretty lame.

From earlier in your post "That is because we have already received our spiritual message and the Spirit says NO." you say it's never done right after doing it... One of us is fluffy all right, but it's not me.

Mind reading again DU? Your word is inadequate to negate the testimony given to me. Remarkable – for a belief system based sooooooo much upon personal revelation and testimony – you a priori dismiss a contrary revelation. That is why the Bereans are such a good example – they studied the scriptures too in making their decision.

Detail? Verbosity is not detail, Detail is not accurate, I have read some very writings that had not a lick of truth in them, detail does not make truth, just detail. on the other hand i testify that I have received a witness direct from God and you denigrate it with "detail".

Oh puhlese! With angels and everything? I challenge the validity and source of your witness. You are allowed to challenge my witness but I can’t challenge yours? Not on my watch.

Yet you blithely stated that "FARMS has been on the LDS payroll since its inception." (Post # 941) When a quick Google proves that to be an utter falsehood, if you thought they were going to catch you, you wouldn't be so cavalier with the truth.

Misstatement because I didn’t google more deeply, my bad. FWIW, FARMS was nowhere until they came under BYU financial umbrella and they cannot be thought of today without associating it to byu. While speaking of utter falsehoods, you lied about me to others without a pinging me. You were pretty cavalier with the truth regarding the writers of NewAvent too. And you have been pretty cavalier here in this post twisting what I and others have posted to you.

I Said: Anti's don't believe God answers prayers to him.
U Said: Just a little earlier DU posted a statement saying that we lie about Mormon doctrine. Kettle meet pot.
I didn't say that all anti's believe that, but some sure do, I can point you to some posts where anti's told me exactly that when talking about Joseph's first vision, but I'm sure you could find them yourself if you wanted to (Google).

DU, do you even read what you post some times? U Said (repeated here) Anti’s don’t believe God answers prayer to him. You did not qualify the statement in any fashion – cavalier with the truth? If you are this cavalier with your words, your interpretation of others is suspect too.

Mormon theology is Christianty, if your beliefs are incompatible with Christinty, repent.

LOL, I quiver beneath the almighty du. If we applied your logic rigorously, then you would have to include RLDS, FLDS and the hundreds of other mormon subgroups as Mormons, LOL. Mormon theology is not that of Christianity, so why don’t you say it a few more times and really show us what you think.

I'm laughing on the inside...

And without answer on the outside.

Actually, it's not hard at all, in this very thread you said "That is because we have already received our spiritual message and the Spirit says NO." that quote was in response to me saying that anti's would do anything but encourage people to pray. Thus you either don't believe that is the answer they will get (which you protested is not so) or you think they are too dumb to get a prayer right and get the correct answer from God, take your pick.

Your testimony is no greater than mine in the subject aspect you put it in this post. My response was in regards to my self and my testimony of the spiritual revelation of the truthfulness (or more appropriately the lack of truthfulness) of the bom and mormonism. I could make the same argument against you on the same points you raise against me. LOL

Lurkers, Godzilla is a paid Theologian, he is paid to represent his church, I am an amateur, I get nothing for my service here.

Lurkers and other FReepers here. DU has pointed out in this post that he tells all that people like me are too stupid to use FR’s capabilities to search. Many months ago DU made this same accusation of me. I told him that if that makes him feel better about it thathe can believe what he wants to. I’ve let him continue because it so humorous the way he tries to paint that on me – as if it was truth that it some how negates what I post here. Now DU has accused me of being a paid Theologian again. This is applied in a manner that is equivalent to a personal attack. So what should my response be?

DU (and any interested Lurkers) please go to my profile page and see what I do for a living.

I am a volunteer minister at my church, in charge of multimedia and children’s ministries. I believe in the biblical call that I am a minister even if I don’t have the position, title or official college transcript. I don’t receive a single penny for my work on behalf of Christ. I post here to counter the false translation of Christian doctrine by many mormons here – DU being one of them (evident in my many exchanges with him).

My through my study of God’s Word, the bom and prayer, I can testify to every one here that the Spirit of God has shown to me that the bom is a fake document, written by a false prophet we’ve been warned about in scripture. Put the book of mormon to the test – is it a real historical document telling us about Jew who live in America, feel free to expand your search - since there is no valid evidence of such presence. The Bereans studied the scriptures to verify Paul’s teachings – and were commended for it. Your eternal life is too precious to place solely upon a subjective burning of the bosom.

Don’t buy a used car from J. Smith.

U Said: Just because you wish my premise to be flawed doesn’t make it so. Just because you wish for your premise to be true does not make it so.

U Said: I can / have documented every portion of my claims in the past here.

and your each and every point has been refuted by me and others here many times, your points are neither true, nor original.

U Said: Poor Joey, the voice of history isn’t kind – only truthful.
Your insistence on using diminutives does not help your case, you call me "Fluffy", and Joseph Smith "Joey", thinking it makes your argument somehow more pithy, in fact it makes you look small minded and petty.

I give you a Chinese saying..."A truly wise man can learn from even a fool." of course like most saying it has been attributed to Confucius, but the point is that sometimes what you find at the table is what you bring to it, not what was already there, you find Joseph's work lacking, other find it enlightening, some find Jesus' work lacking, some find it enlightening, the difference is not in the work people find, but in the people finding it, some are ready others are not.

U Said: Pending prophecies does not equal mormonic continued revelation – particularly that which contradicts the existing revelation.

Pending prophecies of prophets however does obliterate the idea that all prophecy has ended and that there will be no more prophets. AS I said, the Bible has unfulfilled prophecies that speak of prophets in the last days, so there will still be prophets, I did not say that made Mormonism true, just not contradictory to scripture as your stance that there should not be prophets is.

U Said: As you have been unable to prove in the past, there is nothing in Mormonism that isn’t superior to revelations by JW’s, Scientology, Islam, etc. except a blind faith in Joseph Smith.

I have never tried to "prove anyone's religion was inferior to Mormonism" if you thought that was what I am doing you have been laboring under a false assumption.

U Said: Nor does 4000+ changes to the bom? LOL. At least we can justify the identification of additions such as the Johnnane comma. How can you justify those changes to the most correct book on the planet.

Oh yawn, this has been so retreaded here as a red herring it's just a fish carcass , come on!

To get to 4,000 you have to count the addition of verses, punctuation and formatting
The bile has had at least as many "changes" if you want to count those, Hebrew does not even have vowels, do we get to count those as additions, (that would be on par with he ridiculous 4,000 changes claim)
The bible is claimed to be Inerrant which means (as with all absolute statements if one instance can be found where the statement is wrong, then the whole statement is wrong.
most correct, as Joseph said elsewhere, means has the fullness of the gospel and will lead men to God.
The Johannine Comma Is way more than a punctuation, way more than a verse numbering, or a footnote it's more than grammar change, or a word usage correction, it's an addition that changes the meaning of the passage! (so much for inerrant).
There are more "Errors" in the bible, this is just the best known, and even one such error disproves the "inerrant" claim.
Conversely, Mormons do not claim Joseph was perfect, in fact, we know he had many foible and flaws... just like the prophets of old.

Yawn, this has been debunked so many times, don't tell me you have not seen it, oh wait, you were trying to distract from your flawed premise that no imperfect man could do a good work, OK, were back on track after your attempt at distraction...

U Said: There are two handwritten MS in existence. Mormons admit that only a fraction of the changes are attributed to typesetting errors.

The majority are verses, punctuation and spelling changes, so?

U Said: Mormon historians have described the translation process being word for word. So grammar and spelling changes are questionable – unless your god has trouble spelling.

Word for word does not mean letter for letter, and spelling was not as formal as it is now, many variants were considered correct. The grammar was Joseph's own.

U Said: However, significant changes outside of those documents have been made heres one of many:

Ah, the White for Pure, in the 1800's no one worried about white being racist, it meant pure, when used like this, so rather than be called racist, the church (with modern day revelation to back them up) changed the word, there have been, I believe three whole word changes, Protestants have removed whole books from the Bible that the catholics put together.

Then you attempt the Brush of racism, which just does not matter, the gospel is for all god's children, in the day you speak of most churches were doing things that would be considered racist today, I have been in a baptist church that had a balcony that was for the persons of color in those days.

U Said: Christians can go back to extant ms, Mormons go back to ???????? to justify these changes since it was the most correct.

Mormons go to God with their questions, you go to manuscripts...

That is a cop-out. It is the perfected work of Smith and if it is the word of God, you are violating it on something this trivial? Because you cannot copywrite something means you cannot canonize it?

The Bible Is supposed to be "inerrant" according to "orthodox" Christians, Joseph never finished the JST, and never said it was inerrant. As for us using it, apparently you don't know that the Bible as published by the Church includes the JST as foot notes, we just don't publish the whole thing because we'd get our behinds sued off (I guess that would suit you.)

U Said: You are ignorant of what was found at dss site.

I spent a week at Cumron, Nag Hammadi in 2000, they commonly piece together books from pieces of differing scrolls, because often parts of each scroll are unreadable.

U Said: Look at your own statement – parts – not the whole, and those parts missing. All portions of 1 Enoch were found with the exception of Similitudes.

Yep, that's how the workers there said they put things together. Do you deny that before the Dead Sea Scrolls many "experts" were claiming that the whole book of Enoch was written later?

I ask you since this was a cannon of the Ethopic and early church, and in use before that since it was part of the "Scriptures" in the Dead Sea Scrolls when and how exactly did someone slip in a whole new section, pages and pages and nobody noticed? The Johannine Comma has been complained about for a long time, people knew it didn't belong and scholars have been debating these few words for some time, show me the controversy show me the discussions, who was exiled over this? Oh, there was no one. No one complained, "Orthodox" Christians didn't notice because they didn't even use the scriptures in it any more (why is that) and those who were using it have no record of a controversy, because they never saw a change, ergo there was no change.

U Said: And if you were not so context challenged

ROTFLOL! Your attempt at inoculation for being out of context are noted and laughed at...

U Said: I said that those who have studied and translated the Similitudes portion indicate it was not written until after Christ, not the whole document, some as late as 2d century AD. The earliest version of Similitudes is IIRC 1400 AD.

The earliest Copy to date...

Here is a quote from The Book of Enoch

The Book of Enoch Chapter 46:1-2 [1] There I beheld the Ancient of days whose head was like white wool, and with him another, whose countenance resembled that of a man. His countenance was full of grace, like that of one of the holy angels. Then I inquired of one of the angels, who went with me, and who showed me every secret thing, concerning this Son of man; who he was; whence he was; and why he accompanied the Ancient of days. [2] He answered and said to me, This is the Son of man, to whom righteousness belongs; with whom righteousness has dwealt; and who will reveal all the treasures of that which is concealed: for the Lord of spirits has chosen him; and his portion has surpassed all before the Lord of spirits in everlasting uprightness."

This is from the Section called The Book of Parables (37-71), also known as the Book of Similitudes, I have repeatedly pointed out that the phrase the son of Man as quoted by Jesus, and all the gospels use this phrase, this is a prophecy about the Savior, the book was available, the book was in use in the early church, Jude quotes from Enoch, the Catholic church left out a book that Jesus and all the apostles and the early church all considered scripture, but the Bible is complete, there is nothing to add, we kept out the plain and precious truths, don't you dare try to put them back in because they will destroy the dogma we have created of the TRINITY! You care about the Similitudes because parts of that scripture exactly match the book of Abraham as published by the LDS church, it would be a proof of Joseph smith's as a prophet of God that you can't stand to even contemplate, so you have to cling to this razor thin, illogical position which only makes sense if your perspective is "Joseph is a fraud, and anything that supports that is true and any fact that contradicts that presupposition is to be annihilated by any means possible."

I am even going to include what i said last time:

I Said: As to Enoch being considered scripture, so Jesus Quoted from it, the apostles quoted from it, all of Christendom used it until it was not Canonized in Jamnia and even then it's use took hundreds of years to die out, we have it now largely because the Copts continued to use it into modern times (and still do) but hey one blanket quote from Godzilla and nope, it was never used by anybody (the evidence disagrees with you, so who to believe, you or my lying eyes...)

U Said: Your lying eyes.

OK, I'll believe my eyes...

U Said: The Copts include it, they are the exception.

I worked with a Coptic man in Illinois, he thought it was hysterically funny that we (Christians) didn't use a book quoted widely by Jesus and all the apostles...

U Said: Jesus didn’t quote from an unwritten document

You are right, he was quoting from a written document...

U Said: he was citing Daniel.

Daniel was quoting Enoch, so was numbers, go read them with your blinders off, and you will see they are obviously referencing a book they expect us to be familiar with.

U Said: It (Enoch) was never counted as part of the Jewish canon and Jamnia only confirmed what was believed.

That's why it was in the Dead sea scrolls, I mean yeah, they always include unimportant documents in with the scriptures when they are storing them up for the eternities...

U Said: Read a little FF Bruce regarding what the Jews considered canon and the difference from other works like the pseudographical 1 Enoch. If you had bothered to read – or do deeper research – you would see that this was not a blanket statement. Surprising since you are such an expert at that.

I have read much, I have not read everything, I am an amateur, what I have read indicates that the Jews read the book of Enoch, and would have been familiar with the prophecies contained in it, thus, I ask you why would Jesus ask this question: "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" if the prophecy had not yet been made, why did Jude Quote Enoch?

Jude 1 :

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

I note how many "Mockers" there are here, and they're not the Mormons.

I Said: Your time scale is not God's time scale, the falling away happened the the Son of perdition would be revealed, that does not mean immediately. Jesus died that all might be saved, that does not mean immediately, some of us are still down here screwing up (I mean me, no attack should be inferred here).

U Said: The scripture cited tells of a falling away and the revelation of the son of perdition. Cannot have one without the other. He shall be revealed then in connection with the apostasy.

And he will be, but not immediately...

I Said: Please explain how this is a misapplication, really, I'd like to know what you think here.

U Said: I’ve told you numerous times – John was writing against Gnostic though trying to work its way into the church at that time.

So you say Gnostic thought did not penetrate and have influence in the early church? Gnostic

1. pertaining to knowledge.
2. possessing knowledge, esp. esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters.
3. (initial capital letter) pertaining to or characteristic of the Gnostics. 4. (initial capital letter) a member of any of certain sects among the early Christians who claimed to have superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explained the world as created by powers or agencies arising as emanations from the Godhead.

IMHO, the creation of the Trinity was Gnosticism on flagrant display.

U Said: Ohhhh, please don’t throw me in the briar patch! Mystery civilizations!!!!!

Sure, there are entire cities in South America that no one has bothered to explore and document scientifically.

U Said: Your are sooooo predictable and from the weekly world news fame, of mind if you want to continue to ruin your and the bom credibility go ahead. None of these mystery civilizations do not contain any thing that confirms the extensive, in the millions and millions, with large cities and temple, culture described in the bom. Even mormon archaeologists agree.

LOL! Mormon archaeologists agree that there is no evidence of the BOM? Show me one active Mormon archaeologist who says there is no evidence for the Book of Mormon, just one. (I honestly don't think you can)

I Said: If I do you'll just claim the evidence is flawed and there fore there isn't any. or you'll fall back on "peer reviewed" and say anything not published by sources outside the churches is inadmissible (which is a ridiculous standard, let's apply it to say Christianity as a whole...)

U Said: Christianity has archaeological support and doesn’t rely upon church funded hack sites. Archaeology from peer reviewed work is abundant to support biblical history.

According to your standard of people of a faith can't do Archeology that supports that faith and have it be valid, only archeology performed by Muslims is valid. Therefore there is no archaeological evidence supporting the Bible, also there is no evidence that the Jews ever lived in Israel... U Said: But then by your logic we should all believe that the earth is flat or the moon and sun are inhabited.

the Flat Earth Society , dispelling heretic notions and re-educating the masses!

I seem to remember that "Orthodox Christianity was once on their side, wait! that would mean you were wrong once...

Sure Mormons have discussed popular theories about men who lived on the Moon, so? your side actually killed people for saying the the sun went around the earth (Earth's got four corners you know...)

I Said: The DNA study that was so flawed the guys who actually did the research won't talk about it, only laymen who don't understand what was wrong do.

U Said: There have been multiple studies done, another was recently published. Add to that the other –pre dna studies that confirmed the mongoloid descent of the native Americans. They have no need to engage Mormon skeptics. Mormon dna and anthropologist have left the Mormonism in recent years because of the truth these studies have show – point to the make believe story that is the bom.

All the studies start from a flawed premise, that the DNA of Indians is a pure sample, The Book of Mormon itself talks of the Lehi's descendants marrying people who were not descendants of Joseph, or even Jewish, a true DNA study would show all sorts of links, but nothing conclusive because the "Indians" are a polyglot of DNA. Testing Indians from different areas of the Americas will also show different markers, it just depends who married in a few generations ago. That's My point, Indian DNA can say whatever you want because it's all in there, every marker, which one are you going to look for today? Just look in the right group of Indians, you'll find it. The Indians of modern times are what's known as a genetically promiscuous group, the would marry anybody in, if the person wanted to, that means there is no such thing as a pure sample.

I Said: The Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,

U Said: this is sooooo laughable, and soooooo predictable. Here comes chiasmus being drug out again. Chiasmic patterns are present in Shakespear, Dr. Seuss and the bible (which is the most likely source since Smith copied so much of it). The book of Zelph probably even has chiasmus.

Accidental rhymes happen, accidental poems do not.

I Said: the Jewish and Other Semitic Texts Written in Egyptian Characters, (can you say reformed Egyptian which was a tough sell until other records started to show up that way...),

U Said: Reformed Egyptian is still not recognized by real Egyptologists, and a posted article from Maxwell/FARMS. LOL real true scholarship.

Yes, it is, see my earlier example about biblical archeology by Muslims...

I Said: The Paleo Hebrew written on a boulder in Los Lunas Arizona,

U Said: Keep writing, your credibility meter keeps falling.

Are you hoping it will get as low as yours?

I Said: This website also has details of a visit by Mormons investigators who told him it (the stone) didn’t support the bom or their research effort and left. Some resounding evidence DU. Further, the guy pushes a Phoenician origin, not Jewish, and contains Greek characters too.

Nephi details that he reads and writes many languages in the book of Nephi, if you had read the earlier article that you decried because it's from a FARMS site, you'd know that they have found writings in Israel of Unquestionable Hebrew origin from the Time of Lehi written in Hebrew with letters from other languages mixed in, just like the Los Lunas stone.

Of course the Mormons who visited this guy are not reported as saying yep, this proves the book of Mormon, and of course this guy having another theory wouldn't report it if they did, so?

I Said: The The Bat Creek stone with the ten commandments written in Hebrew,

U Said: Holy bat stone mormonman! Right, a single stone – linked to Masonic practices, upon which the whole of new world archaeology, mormon style is based..

Keep reading, Carbon dating of the wood case, and the letters don't match, they are dispelling that "theory" that was put fourth. You need to read more than the headlines and don't stop when you hit one you like, but read the whole article...

U Said: Smithsonian Inst. does not recognize it as a nephite artifact either (was their dig).

Yeah, they were researching the "Mound builders" (have you read about the earthen works the Nephites built as defenses?)

U Said: Where is the rest of the city? Where are the other overwhelming archaeological evidence that should be everywhere here?

What are you expecting from an area that was completely destroyed, a wall with Nephi was here? painted on it?

I Said: there is the Discovery that if you follow the directions given in the Book of Mormon, you find all the unusual landmarks described in it for the middle east, including Naholm and Bountiful

U Said: Nibley didn’t agree with this route,

So if one expert does not agree with an explanation it's false? There goes the archeological evidence for the Bible... the Moslem expert says he has a better explanation...

U Said: nor does the story fit exactly either.

If you read the web site, it fits exactly...

U Said: They didn't find the name Nahom. They found NHM, which can be a number of things, depending on which vowels you choose to insert.

LOL! We know which vowels Joseph inserted,a nd the natives I have seen videos of pronounce it the same way, not only that, it's known as a place to buy travelers, and that's what Nephi's group was doing. This is perfect and more accurate than many of the "archaeological evidences for the Bible" you keep touting.

U Said: The Mormons who discovered the markings decided it must be N-A-H-O-M because that's what they wanted to find.

and what the locals called it... Hey, they aren't Mormons, maybe you'll accept their pronunciation...

U Said: This is "reverse engineering." They looked until they found something vaguely like they wanted to find and declared it to be Bountiful, without any other corroborating research.

Let's see, Naholm, was the right distance from Jerusalem, was found by people trying to follow the directions from the Book of Mormon, natives pronounce it that way, following the directions in the Book of Mormon, if you go due east, you get to a steep sided valley, and a Wadi (small river, or large stream) that flows through the valley all year (just as Nephi describes it.) and this happens to be the only entrance to a small inaccessible stretch of land that is the only place along the coast that is even remotely what was described, by Nephi, yep, it must be a mistake, or faked evidence, or something (only if you start with the premise that the Book of Mormon is false and no evidence to the contrary will sway you.)

U Said: Why is it they can find three letters in the desert but can't find entire cities, like Zarahemla after a century of looking?

It was destroyed in an earthquake... as recorded in the Book of Mormon, a lot of cities were.

U Said: But then with the absence of all other evidences, the Mormon faithful will grasp at any straw they can.

in the face of much evidence the blind believers of anti Mormonism will grasp at any straw they can...

I Said: You will dismiss these one by one and insist that there is no evidence, of course not for there is no man so blind as those who will not see.

Man! I'm good!

U Said: And I could provide evidence that the earth is flat, that would fit your definition and use of evidence does not make it truth, especially if the interpretation of this evidence make it evidence for a much more plausible theory. But then too, because archaeologist have admitted there is no bom archaeology to begin with.

It's amazing to me the you keep bringing up the flat earth debate since it was the Christians of the day that argued against a round earth, then again, the Democrats keep calling Conservatives racist, so I guess it's consistent in a way...

As for this mythical Mormon Archaeologist who says there is no evidence, again name one active Mormon who says there is no Archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon... (Crickets)

I Said: Actually, with the amount of effort that's been put into it you've come up with a surprisingly small amount of stuff. I mean the Treasure hunter stuff still gets play even though it's known to all come from the Salamander letter forged by Mark Hoffman, hey it says what you want it to say, keep using the discredited thing, make people point out that it was a forgery every time, challenge them to prove a negative, that's the ticket!

U Said: I’ve never cited Hoffman (although the living prophet and seer believed he was truthful – so much for supernatural insight huh.

Show where the prophet said he was truthful.. Did we buy stuff from him to get it off the market, yes, so?

as for you never citing him, have you ever referred to him as a treasure hunter? if so, you've cited people citing Hoffman, and that's how this crap lives on. Sloppy research because that's what you wanted to believe.

U Said: However the Tanners saw thru him and his frauds, hmmm who was more inspired).

The tanners purchased some of his works as well...

U Said: Smith’s treasure hunting is supported by plenty other documents – court documents. And IIRC, smith even discusses it in one of his early first vision accounts.

That would be the salamander letter... as for court documents, he was hired to dig, he dug, he was after all a poor backwoods boy of 14 when this all started, remember? I Said: IMHO it's pathetic to pick on a man who was marytered for his faith, and make up stuff about him. pathetic.

U Said: He was murdered by a mob – true, he killed several of them during an escape attempt – hardly the lamb to the slaughter. He ordered the illegal destruction of a newspaper because it exposed his polygamy – so much for following the law of the land.

There was no escape attempt, have you ever even been to Carthage Illinois? The ail he was being held in was surrounded by an armed mob, the only hope was to fool them into waiting by blindly firing a "pepperbox" down the stairs and hoping they thought there were more guns. If the mob had waited, the regulars would have come back from the speech being given by the governor, and he would have been safe. Instead the guards, joined the mob and told them that was it, an unreliable gun with maybe six shots and they'd be unarmed. The prophecies Joseph made about who would survive and how were truly miraculous. The Jump to the window was to save other people's lives, with the mob outside that window, there was no hope of escape.

The Newspaper was declare a public nuisance and in full accordance with the law of the day, it was destroyed by the duly sworn officers of the law of the day. The town even offered to pay for the press. I also note that you have never shed a tear over the Mormon presses (plural) that were destroyed as people tried to keep the Book of Mormon from being printed your concern seems a bit one sided.

Lastly, Polygamy was legal in that Day and age and place. No federal law, the state's law was hung up in the courts, and the City charter allowed them to set their own laws on the subject. Again you only see the facts on one side of the issue.

I Said: The Adam God theory was a Theory that was indeed talked about by Brigham young, I understand the theory, but it has never been the Doctrine of the church, so? It's not the only thing you guys misquote, come on the JOD is full of non cannoned theories by lots of prominent Mormons, you can do better then the AGT

U Said: Apart from Young’s inspired declaration that he never preached a sermon that should not be considered doctrine, which can easily be looked up

Really, when and where was that Canonized (it wasn't)

U Said: I’m sure that there are plenty of others who can show that other doctrines were linked to this one, particularly the old well loved phrase as man is God was and as God is man will become.

Actually, that is a quote about the Deification of man which the early church fathers believed and indeed is a biblical doctrine.

U Said: However, his sermon was presented in total – how can you misquote an entire sermon. The teaching was clear within the sermon as it was in the extracted citations. But that was just one example. The other extracts on other subjects and speakers are shown to be clear as well.

There are many entire sermons that have been given in many, if not all churches that are not the doctrine of the at church, yes even many given by notable names in those churches, so what, it's not the doctrine of the LDS church, and those sermons are not the doctrine of those respective churches unless they choose to canonize them.

I Said: I see nothing in the scriptures you quote about Satan answering a prayer to God.

U Said: And I’ve seen no statement in the scripture saying that Satan wouldn’t or couldn’t either. More broad brush misrepresentation we’ve all come to expect from you.

God has promised to answer prayers to him, that kind of precludes Satan doing so.

I Said: I suppose the Protestants were not too long ago Catholics and with the repudiation of some small differences could be again...

U Said: There were differences – yes. Different basic religion – no, we are both Christian.

Yes, we all believe in Christ here, some of us are just paid hacks to attack another religion...

I Said: But they are not now, nor are Mormons and the FLDS the same church, and you again don't look good claiming to be a man of God and bending the truth. God never lies, those who follow him shouldn't either.

U Said: So are you claiming Mormonism never practiced and condoned polygamy?

Of course not, but it was legal then, once the court of last resort ruled, we complied, as required by our beliefs, the FLDS broke away (like the protestants broke away from the Catholics and started separate churches) the FLDS are not LDS.

U Said: AFA LDS=FLDS, they are more like you than you are like Christianity theologically.

So since you are theologically similar to Fred Phelps you are guilty of all the crap he has done? I don't believe that, and no one with an IQ above room temperature will either.

U Said: I said what FLDS is today, LDS was about a century ago and LDS have not revoked Section 132 which officially sanctioned polygamy 100 yrs ago. What truth bending that?

It's called a lie of omission (Where you leave out something important on purpose...), OFFICIAL DECLARATION—1 forbids the practice of plural marriage, period so all Mormons will obey it, it's been Canonized. Claiming we can't change that with a later revelation would also mean you have to stone all adulterers, divorced people who remarry being adulterers, and homosexuals, eat Kosher foods, and not turn your lights on or off on between Friday's sunset and Saturday's sunset. I'd also bet You don't perform blood sacrifices at the temple as the bible commands either.

To insist that we can't negate a scripture with a later revelation while insisting that God did that in the Bible makes you a hypocrite of the most obvious order.

U Said: Man has free will – they can choose or not. I cannot reach out through my computer and stop them. But I also recognize that false prophets will go out and deceive many – that’s in the bible you know.

Yes, and it had begun while the Bible was still being written, one of the most because instances is the man made Dogma of the Trinity which is so unbiblical that the word appears nowhere in scripture.

U Said: If they have the full information – which Mormons themselves admit they don’t provide – milk before meat – they can make an informed decision.

We teach everything, just not in the order you want it in...

9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

IMHO, You want people to choke on the meat, you seem to have a goal indeed of forcing any who are interested to learn at your pace and your way. Force is Satan's way.

U Said: I am comfortable knowing that it is less likely they will take Mormonism literally after reading your nonsense.

and I am comfortable knowing that any who read my testimony of Jesus, and Decide to Put our religion to "The Test" will find plenty of support from God to over coma anything you or Satan can throw at them, in fact, I periodically get questions about getting a Copy of the Book of Mormon in large print, or in another language, which satisfies me that many are following my links for a free Book of Mormon, and your posts while large and full of inaccuracies are just leading people to the church who are ready for it, the see through your misstatements and prayerfully, they press forward from the world of peer review and doctrines of men and enter the world of faith and revelation offered by a church based on God and Faith, not on Dogma and the logic of men.

I Said: Hence the discouragement of prayer...

U Said: Pot talking again?

Nope, just truth telling, if you honestly believed that people would get a negative answer, you would be begging people to pray about the Book of Mormon, instead, you spend all your time on these posts telling people why they should not even bother to pray about it, you already know it's wrong, don't ask God, ask Godzilla! False prophets indeed. Go look in the mirror will you?

U Said: Where did I ever say not to pray in regards to making decisions…….. don’t bother, you find it. What has been said, inspite of your twisting of our words is that study needs to be an important component – not superceded by feelings. No evidence of discouraging the Bereans from prayer either.

Study, absolutely, thus I keep offering a Free Book of Mormon, and if you need one, a Free Bible, I encourage every one to read both, compare the spirit of Both, pray about Both and when God (not Satan) answers you can compare his answer to First John 4:1-3 as I did and know that your testimony of the Truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, Accompanied by a testimony of Jesus Christ is of God, and you will know that Joseph Smith, flawed imperfect Joseph Smith was called by God as a prophet in the modern days as the Bible prophesies there will be prophets in the last days.

Folks, I challenge Godzilla to join me in calling for every one to Put our religion to "The Test" by getting a Free Book of Mormon, and if you need one, a Free Bible, to read and pray about both, for as he said, "study needs to be an important component" So that everyone can know for themselves if god will answer a prayer of faith with knowledge:

7 ¶ Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?
10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?
12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

This seems to be a good place to end tonight, Godzilla, I challenge you to Do as you would have me do unto you, and call upon people to pray honestly to God and ask him for knowledge of the truth by reading a Book of Mormon with their bible and comparing the spirit of the two. IF you don't join me in calling for this prayerful exercise before the lord, you will stand revealed by your actions as a man who is opposed to the prayer of others, a man who wants others to listen to him instead of God, a man who is not a messenger of Christ.

I Said: LOL, I think you have a Joseph Smith Fetish, I was thinking of Brigham young, but hey there are lots of dead guys to chose from and Anti's don't seem to be picky...

U Said: So you would discourage people from examining the claims of Mormonism and its prophets?

Of course not, however, I would not start with the same claims you would, I would start with claims that uplift, you would start with claims that have no evidence and no redeeming value, here you'll do it again in a second if I just wait...

U Said: Are you saying that one is only allowed to believe the sanitized history of Joey– you would prevent them from doing that?

LOL! I would start with the truth and graduate to the lies that have been told about him, not start with lies and never get to the truth...

U Said: If your posts indicate anything, it appears that you would not allow anything contrary BECAUSE he is dead. Tsk tsk DU, that is pretty lame.

IS it lame to argue his works, instead of just dismissing them, is it lame to actually want to evaluate evidence, not just claim it's not peer reviewed, is it lame to say that anyone who just posts an accusation against the a dead and presents no evidence, worse who denies evidence tot he contrary while still presenting no evidence is a charlatan and not playing fair. Joseph smith was a prophet of God, not perfect. Joseph smith was a good man, Joseph smith is still vilified to day not because of who he was in his heart, but what he preached and how that gospel threatens those who believe the lie of the Trinity. U Said: Mind reading again DU? Your word is inadequate to negate the testimony given to me.

I have never tried to negate a testimony from God to anyone, you included.

U Said: Remarkable – for a belief system based sooooooo much upon personal revelation and testimony – you a priori dismiss a contrary revelation. That is why the Bereans are such a good example – they studied the scriptures too in making their decision.

How many times have i posted that First John 4:1-3 played a huge part in my examination of the Book of Mormon. I.E. I studied the scriptures as part of my decision, and First John 4:1-3 was completely fulfilled telling me that my message was from God.

I Said: Detail? Verbosity is not detail, Detail is not accurate, I have read some very detailed writings that had not a lick of truth in them, detail does not make truth, just detail. on the other hand I testify that I have received a witness direct from God and you denigrate it with "detail".

U Said: Oh puhlese! With angels and everything?

There were no angels...

U Said: I challenge the validity and source of your witness.

Fine, I have recorded my witness publicly Here. U Said: You are allowed to challenge my witness but I can’t challenge yours? Not on my watch.

Not on your watch, your timer, or even your clock.

I Said: Yet you blithely stated that "FARMS has been on the LDS payroll since its inception." (Post # 941) When a quick Google proves that to be an utter falsehood, if you thought they were going to catch you, you wouldn't be so cavalier with the truth.

U Said: Misstatement because I didn’t google more deeply, my bad. FWIW, FARMS was nowhere until they came under BYU financial umbrella and they cannot be thought of today without associating it to byu.

U Said: While speaking of utter falsehoods, you lied about me to others without a pinging me.

I strive to always ping anyone I mention by name, if I did not mention you by name, then it's your overly tender pride, not my fault, if I mentioned you by name and did not ping you, I assure you it was an oversight, and I apologize. I do not, like some anti Mormons here, try to talk about people without pinging them as a regular course of my postings.

U Said: You were pretty cavalier with the truth regarding the writers of NewAvent too. And you have been pretty cavalier here in this post twisting what I and others have posted to you.

That's rich, you have been asserting falsehoods without backup all over and now you accuse me of being Cavalier with the truth, well if what I am doing is "Cavalier" with eh truth, then you and truth have been separated for years and the divorce papers are on the way!

as for twisting what is posted, you are indeed a past master, starting with the editorial power of not posting all that you are responding to.

U Said: DU, do you even read what you post some times?

I always read what I post, I also write my own material...

U Said: U Said (repeated here) Anti’s don’t believe God answers prayer to him. You did not qualify the statement in any fashion – cavalier with the truth?

Did I say All? Did I say You? Please ping the Mods and ask, having been around as long as I have, I can tell you this is an accepted form, you may feel free to add some if your sensibilities are to tender to read the shorthand of a website such as FR.

U Said: If you are this cavalier with your words, your interpretation of others is suspect too.

Have I ever accused anyone by name of something that was untrue? You have. Have I ever called you names (other than your screen name) in anything other than an attempt at humor? (you keep calling me fluffy, and Joseph Smith Joey) you claim you are telling "the truth", if so, why the need for insults? You claim there is great evidence, yet you never dig very deep, instead flitting from one unfounded charge to another, when faced with a link to another site you tend to either impugn the site, or dismiss it as "propaganda". I have yet to observe you actually address the contents of a link that refutes your claim. People who are after the truth generally don't behave in the manner I have observed. U Said: Mormon theology is Christianity, if your beliefs are incompatible with Christianity, repent.

U Said: LOL, I quiver beneath the almighty du.

Please, that image was entirely uncalled for.

U Said: If we applied your logic rigorously, then you would have to include RLDS, FLDS and the hundreds of other because subgroups as Mormons, LOL.

Let me explain this, and I'll try to use small words so every one can understand this apparently difficult to grasp point.

Christianity is a faith defined by believing in Jesus Christ as the savior.

Churches like Baptists (yes even the west borough ones) Pentecostals, holly rollers, Catholics, Mormons, FLDS, RLDS, Calvinists, Lutherans, etc. are all churches that are separate entities that all believe in Jesus Christ as their savior, thus they are separate churches, but all Christian in their faith.

Buddhists and Muslims have subdivisions or "churches" in their faith(s) as well.

U Said: Mormon theology is not that of Christianity, so why don’t you say it a few more times and really show us what you think.

Mormon's definitely believe in Jesus Christ, Mormon is a nickname given to us by other churches, the Full name of the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, if you want to shorten it, we prefer LDS, why because? Because LDS church also uses a book called the Book of Mormon a second witness of Jesus Christ, the Book of Mormon is a record of a branch of the house of Israel that come over to the Americas and live the Gospel, Jesus comes to visit them in the Americas after his resurrection in Jerusalem. These were the other sheep he talked about to the people at Jerusalem.

I Said: I'm laughing on the inside...

U Said: And without answer on the outside.

LOL! If there's one thing I pride myself on, it's never being at a loss for words. Anyone who reads these threads will know I speak the truth here....

I Said: Actually, it's not hard at all, in this very thread you said "That is because we have already received our spiritual message and the Spirit says NO." that quote was in response to me saying that anti's would do anything but encourage people to pray. Thus you either don't believe that is the answer they will get (which you protested is not so) or you think they are too dumb to get a prayer right and get the correct answer from God, take your pick.

U Said: Your testimony is no greater than mine in the subject aspect you put it in this post.

Yes, we are indeed both testifying that we received an answer from God, however, I am encouraging others to go get an answer from God, you are not doing that, and it calls your answer into question.

U Said: My response was in regards to my self and my testimony of the spiritual revelation of the truthfulness (or more appropriately the lack of truthfulness) of the bom and Mormonism.

Great! so why aren't you encouraging others to have this same experience and receive an answer from God!

U Said: I could make the same argument against you on the same points you raise against me. LOL

I guess you can say anything you like, but accusing me of not encouraging people to try what I did will IMHO be a hard sell, especially with me posting in response and encouraging it.

Let me put it this way, let's say just for the sake of discussion the there's this religion, we'll call them religion X. X tells everyone to pray and God will tell them they are true. You and I both decide to pray about it, and you get no answer, so you decide it's not true, and I get a direct revelation from God (maybe I'm dense and won't stop praying about it) Anyway, God tells me it's phony Baloney, plastic banana absolutely not true. You might just tell people it's not true, but I am going to go out and encourage people to pray about it (get this) because if you pray about it long enough God will tell you it's a lie.

Getting an answer from God is such a life changing event that everyone should have it, even if it's to tell you something is wrong.

This is not religion X we are discussing, it's The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, LDS for short. I have prayed about the Book of Mormon, I have received a witness direct from God my actions are consistent with my statements.

On the other hand, you claim to have received an answer, yet you discourage others from seeking that same answer from God just because he said "it's not true." I'll leave off this diatribe with a Chinese saying "In questioning Deity, any answer is significant" You just aren't acting like a person who got an answer direct from God, because you do not act as if it's "significant".

I Said: Lurkers, Godzilla is a paid Theologian, he is paid to represent his church, I am an amateur, I get nothing for my service here.

U Said: Lurkers and other FReepers here. DU has pointed out in this post that he tells all that people like me are too stupid to use FR’s capabilities to search. Many months ago DU made this same accusation of me. I told him that if that makes him feel better about it thathe can believe what he wants to.

Actually, I asked if he was a professional and he said that he was. now, on this thread, he won't deny it, why is that?

U Said: I’ve let him continue because it so humorous the way he tries to paint that on me – as if it was truth that it some how negates what I post here.

I bring it up especially here, on this thread, because you are saying that FARMS, now being supported by BYU (indeed you erroneously assert that they have always been supported by the LDS Church) negates the truth of their posts and articles.

It's a pot and Kettle kind of thing.

U Said: Now DU has accused me of being a paid Theologian again.

Because you said you were before, and you are attacking paid people here...

U Said: This is applied in a manner that is equivalent to a personal attack. So what should my response be?

Try simply telling the truth, Are you now or have you ever been employed by a church?

It's a simple question.

U Said: DU (and any interested Lurkers) please go to my profile page and see what I do for a living.

"Been there, seen that." I went right after you said you were a minister on another thread, I thought it was interesting that you didn't mention that, even though it seems to be a big part of your public persona here. That said, personal pages can contain almost anything, and can be changed at any time.

U Said: I am a volunteer minister at my church, in charge of multimedia and children’s ministries. I believe in the biblical call that I am a minister even if I don’t have the position, title or official college transcript. I don’t receive a single penny for my work on behalf of Christ. I post here to counter the false translation of Christian doctrine by many Mormons here – DU being one of them (evident in my many exchanges with him).

Interesting, so the "Volunteers" at FARMS are religious hacks and you are performing a noble service, it's a perspective thing I guess.

I would not be posting here except people like yourself come here and misrepresent my churches positions on the Gospel. There is an easy way for you and the other anti's to stop my and most other Mormons posts here, stop attacking us. You are the aggressor here, I have never come over to a thread about your religion (which ever one it is, and no, I don't even want to know) and started posting quotes from the first vision, or Book of Mormon, or attacking the trinity, IMHO that would be rude, also IMHO you are rude for doing that to us.

U Said: My through my study of God’s Word, the bom and prayer, I can testify to every one here that the Spirit of God has shown to me that the bom is a fake document, written by a false prophet we’ve been warned about in scripture. Put the book of because to the test – is it a real historical document telling us about Jew who live in America, feel free to expand your search - since there is no valid evidence of such presence.

Finally, A call for others to check it out, unfortunately, the highest authority you cite is your own intellect, your study, you say the spirit has shown you, how? I received a very specific testimony, did you? We can't tell from your post. was that testimony accompanied by a testimony of Jesus having come in the flesh? we can't tell from your post and many on the Anti Mormon side have pointed out that Satan would love to deceive anyone asking God a question. You said that the "Spirit of God has shown you..." This could be many things from "I believe God led me to study this anti Mormon book I found in the library", to "I saw a vision". I believe you believe that you received an answer. from your post we don't know if that answer was from a library book, or the Spirit of God itself. We just can't tell from your post, no, I am not asking for specifics, but I am asking for enough to know what happened. IMHO if you received an answer from God, you would be a bit more excited about telling about it.

For example: ask my Mom about the first time she felt the spirit confirm to her that the Book of Mormon was true, she can't help it, the tears will flow because it's such a seminal event in her life, it's so powerful that to this day the mere memory of a direct communication from God echoes in her life like a bell that's been struck and is still vibrating.

I don't cry about mine every time, I don't give some of the details because they are too sacred to me to share on a forum where they would undoubtedly be mocked and made fun of by persons such as yourself, however, my answer was specific and I have in general terms described what was in it. I have since than seen visions in answer to prayer, and I can tell you a few things about answers from God:

Messages from God will always contain a testimony of Jesus.
Messages from God are always uplifting in that they lead men to him.
Messages from God are always a good thing, everyone should because as many as they can.
Messages from God are always clear, God never miscommunicates, you don't have to guess at his meaning.
Messages from God are sharper and more detailed than reality itself. (this is difficult to describe unless you have experienced it)

If You received an answer from God, you should be encouraging all with vigor to replicate your experience.

U Said: The Bereans studied the scriptures to verify Paul’s teachings – and were commended for it. Your eternal life is too precious to place solely upon a subjective burning of the bosom.

Don’t buy a used car from J. Smith.

There are many ways for God to testify to men, indeed God will use the way that is "perfect" for each man. a burning in the bosom is only one such method, and if the communication comes from God it will be enough, as for me personally, I received much more than just a burning feeling, my answer was specific and included a testimony of Jesus Christ as promised in First John 4:1-3 Why did I because such a specific biblical response? Maybe it was because I was unable to because any other answer, maybe it was because I had already read the Bible from cover to cover four times with specific topical study thrown in for good measure, I don't know all the answers, but I am a high functioning autistic, and as such am not exactly in touch with "feelings", I am more a creature of logic, and my posts reflect the logic and different perspective that come with Autism.

You can believe me or not, that is up to you, but I am consistent, and true to the testimony of Jesus that I bear in my heart.

Godzilla, I bear you no ill will, I just wish you could see as I do. Is it a crime to want to share your testimony and perspective? If you truly received a negative witness, and you know that my posts will always encourage people to test what I say with prayer, then you should have no problem with me, or my posts. that would be logical...

Go with God.