The Cult has started a new ad campaign in New York [Where the Mormon tithe & temple fits in]

ExMormonforums.com ^ | Nov. 27, 2012 | Infymus

[Colofornian]

http://www.lds.org/church/news/mormonor ... c?lang=eng

How about being straight up and saying that Mormons put on costumes and chant rituals in secret buildings that only 10% of gross earnings paid as "tithes" allow entrance?

Mormonism wants people to think they are normal that they are just Christians like everyone else. Each year they get rid of more and more of their embarrassing doctrines - or doctrines that aren't politically correct anymore. Apologist attack dogs fight any critics on technicalities.

Mormonism has one thing that works for them - and that is the funneling of cash from members to the Cult coffers. This is done through mandatory tithe. And in order to make this tithe work - and make the member believe in the Cult enough to pay - they have to have the secret temple ceremonies. You have to put a ton of make believe in there.

Stephen R. Donaldson is one of my favorite authors. In one of his series of books he explained how a great and noble group of leaders were slowly corrupted through the centuries by simple infiltration of ideas. The ideas changed the group slowly until they went from helping people to human sacrifices. The new leaders of the group knew what was going on - but they surrounded themselves with those who only had faith - not knowledge. Those who had faith were much stronger because they were driven by the new cult. Those who held faith were much easier to control.

Pondering the story Donaldson had written I saw the same manifested in the Cult of Mormonism. If you have members who are so convinced you are the one and only true Cult, they will not hesitate to open their pocketbooks and hand over everything. Mormonism needs this kind of special, secret, garment wearing, new name, pay lay ale - in order to keep the tithes flowing. If the cat is out of the bag, the tithing will stop.

So the reality is there is a certain point where Mormonism must stop moving towards Christianity - it has to because money is ultimately the top priority of the Cult. Money - Power - Control.

Look at all the recovery boards right now - even the NOM boards. What is the #1 topic right now because of upcoming December? Tithing. Tithing. Tithing. Oh and don't forget tithing. Sign up for tithing settlement. And don't forget to sign up for tithing settlement.

“All of our messaging is focused on helping people understand that Mormons are Christian,”

Naw, Mormonism isn't a Christian church. It's a secretive Cult with very cultish practices and it has to stay that way - or go broke.

[Godzilla]

True or false, The Bible references Books of Scripture which are not in it?

Hey DU, if the mormon god feels these should be scripture - let your mormon god tell your prophet. Otherwise it is a non-starter and just another mormon assault on the integrity of the bible.

[BlueDragon]

The guy did conflate use of singular imported sayings or poetic alliterations to being "lost books", which doesn't work at all when the source for those quoted can be found to be contemporaneous to Paul's era. Unless we import those particular source materials into the canon, which still leaves the BoM in the lurch.

Also there appeared a stretch to incorporate some other's apologetic concerning OT Apocrypha as diversion, to cast doubt, to then open up a crack into which Joey Smith's stuff can be squiggled in, gaining entry.

Generalization is common enough and can be acceptable, but inexactitude can hide much, when one get's crafty with it.

[svcw]

((clapping hands))

[Colofornian]

If the Bible were held to the standard that you hold the Book of Mormon to, it would fare far worse with every edition's differences being added to the total “errors corrected”...

Delf, it's the Mormons who claim that the Book of Mormon "translation" was done with divine power...and that an angel authenticated it all...

So the angel just flunked a final edit, eh?

Examples:

* Since the phrases "even the Son" and "the Son of God were added to 1 Nephi 11:21,32 since the 1830 version...how could Smith and the angel have got that wrong?

* 1 Nephi 20:1 is copied from Isiah 48...Yet "out of the waters of baptism" was added since the original 1830 edition; it was missing from the 1978 Book of Mormon, but suddenly showed up again in the 1985 Book of Mormon. Why?

* One of the most infamous changes in the Book of Mormon occurs in Mosiah 21:28. In the original 1830 edition, the name "Mosiah" was "Benjamin." yet...a few chapters earlier -- Mosiah 6:5 -- Benjamin had already died! Apparently it took the next edition before somebody noticed that Joseph Smith had errored...and corrected it!!!!

Overall, though, why are even simple grammatical changes of import?

Because...had you, DU, as a missionary given an original 1830 Book of Mormon version to english-reading contacts...guess what they would have seen?

Why, they'd be reading places like...
* 2 Nephi chapter 12 thru chapter 22...which are the books of Isaiah chapters 2 thru 12.
* Or 3 Nephi 13 & 14...which is Matthew chapters 6 & 7.
* or 3 Nephi 15, which borrowed heavily from Isaiah.
* Or 3 Nephi 20, which borrows from 13 verses from Isaiah 52.
* Or Nephi 22, which is Isaiah 54.
* Or 3 Nephi 24 and 25, which is Malachi 3 and 4. etc etc etc...
...and then even beyond all of the above -- instead instead of entire chapters being lifted word for word by a word-thief named Joseph Smith -- we have Kings James English phrases lifted phrase for phrase thruout the Book of Mormon...as if people in 1830 spoke King James English!!!

Now why would the above had been especially of import to English readers...as they might be reading an original 1830 Book of Mormon version?

Because the KJV language in the Bible is so majestic. So appealing from even a pure literary vantage point. So smooth. So flowing. So poetic.

By sharp contrast......for English readers to bump up vs. the backwoods, pre-corrected grammatically corrected Book of Mormon would show how uninspired the original Book of Mormon content part would be.

It would be like two people giving a "presentation" where they only read the writings of others ...
...One presenter-reader would present material that was majestic, poetic, highly literary, flowing, smooth, vital, two-sided sword like...
...the other presenter-reader presents clumsy, awkward, bumpy, illiterate, anachronistic, nonsensical at points, dead wrong at others, unnecessarily repetitious of "It came to pass" phrases and "behold" this and that...which would be especially nonsensical if the writer had to actually engrave "it came to pass" that many times on gold plates!!! (On plates one of the Book of Mormon characters claims he didn't have a lot of space to include much!)

And then at the end of it all, the two presenters ask you to read, pray and believe that ALL of the above content came from the same source.

The hearers in the audience would be shaking their heads in wonderment? What? Same source??? You've got to be kidding!

Believe me, DU...anybody reading the 1830 uncleaned-up version would readily realize that the Book of Mormon original content doesn't belong in the same league as Matthew, Malachi, Isaiah, etc.

So, that's what the Mormon "clean-up Book of Mormon brigade" did...they sought to at least lower the obvious contrast in content between what Smith directly stole phrase by phrase, chapter by chapter from the Bible...vs. the original content he put in there.

[Boogieman]

“IMHO, all the words of God are important”

Sure, they are all important, but I don’t think they are all of equal priority. For example, if I only have one day to study the Bible with someone who is terminally ill, I’m not going to start with some genealogies from the book of Kings, I’m going to start with the Gospel.

“Obviously... my interpretation differs, surprise! Just don’t say I have nothing to base it on, for I do.”

Well, you really don’t have much to base the interpretation on, except for the words of Joseph Smith, or whatever other LDS figure came up with that interpretation. Anyone can propose a meaning to words in the Bible, saying “Judah means the Old Testament and Joseph means the New Testament”, for example. I could just as easily say “Judah means Pizza and Joseph means Chicken Wings”, but that’s no sound basis for hermeneutics.

If you want it to be a reasonable interpretation, it has to be based on reasonable rules. For example, if the meaning is inferred from the context, or defined in another passage, or derived from usage of similar metaphors whose meaning is clearly understood. You can’t appeal to any of those methods in this instance, because they would all contradict your interpretation.

“Not up to you, God does things his way, and as you pointed out earlier, he sets things up so no one can credibly say He didn’t do it right (like not being fully man)”

You are the one who offered the multiple witness requirement as showing a need for the BoM. I’ve simply shown that the requirement was more than fulfilled by the New Testament books alone.

“Have you read and studied the Book of Mormon as I have? It is in agreement, in so far as it can be.”

I’ve read most of it, more than a casual skimming, but not in its entirety. I really don’t need to study it deeply to say it’s not in agreement with the other Gospels, though. The other Gospels tell me that Christ died, rose again on the third day, spent forty days on Earth after that, then ascended to Heaven, where He sits at the right hand of God until the end of days. The BoM tells me that Jesus flits around the Earth visiting people to deliver his message personally, instead of reigning in Heaven with the Father until the appointed time.

If I was going to make it my full-time mission to try and minister to Mormons, then I’d probably study the whole book to find more contradictions, but that one is big enough for me to know what I need to know for my own purposes.

“To illustrate, how exactly did Judas die? They all say he Died, but in different ways. It is impossible to agree with the bible on this point because you can agree with one, but not all the scriptures.”

They’re not in direct contradiction, but only apparent contradiction, since there are multiple ways the verses can be read without contradiction. So, if you want to see a contradiction, then you will, but only if you are ignoring the alternative explanations.

“They did better than editing, the just didn’t include books that made it clear they were wrong in the Bible.”

How convenient. Well, if the canon is invalid, then you’ve thrown the door open to every other pseudochristian book that was excluded as well. Why shouldn’t I then believe in the Gnostic Jesus? There are books that say he is the real one and all the people who deny it are wrong.

“God cannot interfere with Agency or he would break his word (and cease to be God) so he gave man his truth, and man beign imperfect corrupted it. But God knwe it would be corrupted, so he set up a way in the future for the truth to be restored.”

Yet, God doesn’t need to interfere with Agency in order to preserve His Word faithfully. I gave you one example already, King Josiah and the Book of the Law, where He did just that. Every time we discover an ancient manuscript of the Bible that has survived the ages, we have another example. For all we know, the original writings of the New Testament are all collected and buried in some rubble under an apartment building in Turkey, waiting for us to find them.

Another point to note, is that God can influence us without interfering with Agency. For example, giving us His Word infuences us, giving us commandments that we can choose to follow or not follow influences us, and the witnessing of His believers also influences us, all without interfering with Agency in the least. So, it’s not unreasonable to think that God can use His influence to preserve His Word, especially when there are direct references to that in the Bible (commandments to make no alterations, to transmit faithfully, to not accept different doctrines, etc).

“Joseph did not rewrite the word of God, but miraculously through his power and foresight preserved the Book of Moroni in it’s entirety and perfection to deliver us from the evils of this day.”

Well, the claim is that Smith “restored the Gospel”. Obviously, the implication is that something in the existing Gospel was removed or changed, requiring a restoration. When that was the case in the Old Testament, with the books of Moses, God did not tell Josiah where to find another book, or to call his scribes so he could dictate a new book. Instead, God miraculously preserved the same Word that He had given to Moses, and delivered it to Josiah. If the analogous had happened with regards to Joseph Smith, then the Angel Moroni would have delivered to him the original manuscripts of the Gospels, not a new gospel that nobody had ever heard of before.

“God did not testify of their works, he did testify of the Book of Mormon.”

Well, by the standard you use, God did testify just as much of Muhammad as he did the Book of Mormon. The Muslims do exactly as you did with your prophecy example, they take an existing Biblical prophecy, and say it refers to Muhammad, even though that interpretation violates all hermeneutics and nobody but themselves believes that interpretation to be correct. They use the prophecy of the comforter, and just say the comforter is Muhammad. Prove them wrong :P

“Boogieman, The Bible can and will yet be twisted by men, you can’t stop it, and neither can I. I can pray and God can and will tell me what to believe and with him I cannot be deceived by man.”

Sure, you can pray, and God may tell you what to believe, or He may not. People can believe that they are praying to God, when they are not, and they can be deceived in their hearts. Don’t you think the billions of people on the planet praying to false gods feel, in their heart, that their deities are true, and that they aren’t deceived?

Relying on emotion is fraught with hazard because human judgment and reason are clouded by emotion. The very word “emotional” can be used as a antonym to “rational” because of this effect. We all know this danger, because we see it anytime we are arguing with a liberal, who refuses to see facts or contradictions because they are basing their beliefs on feelings. Sometimes, we don’t see that the exact same danger is present when it comes to matters of religion, but it is there.

“The Bible says to pray... so, IMHO you need to pray about it, not just read it.”

Well, I do pray, but I’m just saying that I didn’t pray to find out if the Bible was true when I was first reading it, since I didn’t believe in God at that time, nor did I want to believe the Bible was true. Why would I pray when I didn’t believe prayer held any power? I would have just seen it as talking to myself.

“I do have to ask, if you found there was more to the Bible that had been translated form the dead sea scrolls, would you read it?”

Yes, sure. I have actually read the Dead Sea Scrolls, along with plenty of other apocrypha, pseudoepigraphia, and the like. Heck, I’ve even read David Koresh’s book.

[Boogieman]

“The Mormons took a bit of a different route, but give it a couple hundred years and all this “You’re not a Christian stuff will die out)”

Hey, you’re getting off easy since we mostly stopped burning people at the stake before you guys showed up!

“Agreed, and Mormons do not worship Joseph Smith any more than the Jews worship Moses, Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, beside him there is no other, and that makes us Christian, Un-Orthodox to be sure, but Christian none the less.”

Well, I look at it this way. Perhaps it’s true that the LDS religion is transmitting the gospel faithfully enough that people are coming to a belief in Jesus and being saved. For the sake of argument, let’s say that it is. However, let’s also say, for the sake of argument, that Joseph Smith wasn’t a prophet, but just a talented story teller who managed to mix that gospel in with some of his own stories, and get people to believe the whole lot.

Now, if I know people are coming to Jesus because they got involved with the LDS, I might be happy, but I still wouldn’t advise anyone to join that church, and I would still try to convince people that were in that church of their errors. Otherwise, if they became disillusioned with the stories that Joseph Smith told, they might become disillusioned with Christ too, and throw the baby out with the bathwater. It would still be better for them to base their beliefs on the untainted gospel, and not the gospel along with the demonstrably tainted works of men.

[BlueDragon]

More good documentation. Plagiarized and smuggled in to “books” with new names listed by chapter. There really needs to be a good, searchable depository for such items.

[Boogieman]

“A) if God has more to say, who are we to shut his mouth”

Saying a prophet isn’t required, per Scripture, is not saying God can’t send one.

“B) Amos 3:7 http://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/amos/3.7?lang=eng says God will do nothing without telling his servants the prophets, therefore you need prophets in order for the second coming to be warned about, just like the first was.”

Sure, and there will be prophets to warn of the second coming, they are prophesied about in the Bible. However, those prophets are accompanied by unmistakable miracles, just like the New Testament prophets were. They will also, like all true prophets, prophecy in agreement with existing scriptures, otherwise they’d be false prophets.

“Agreed, but the emaciated, skeletal, wimpy figure found on many crosses well, not my Jesus.”

Well, remember the Catholic iconographers have been at this for thousands of years. Originally, their model didn’t look like a concentration camp victim, I’m sure. One artist made him look a little more haggard, to convey his suffering more vividly, and then another guy tried to one up him. After two thousand years of that back and forth, they’re left with a stick figure!

[svcw]

You say: Mormons do not worship Joseph Smith

Maybe not but according to your leaders (lds) jesus is secondary to Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith: “I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam... Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.” (History of The Church, 6:408–409

Joseph Fielding Smith, Mormonism's tenth president, "no salvation without Joseph Smith." (Doctrine of Salvation 1:189).

LDS Prophet Brigham Young, in 1859, stated, "From the day that the priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up things of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are -- I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent" (Journal of Discourses 7:238).

Brigham Young taught, "How are you going to get your resurrection? You will get it by the President of the resurrection pertaining to this generation, and that is Joseph Smith. Hear it all ye ends of the earth; if ever you enter into the kingdom of God it is because Joseph Smith let you go there. This will apply to Jews and Gentiles, to the bond, and the free; to friends and foes; no man or woman in this generation will get a resurrection and be crowned, without Joseph Smith saying so. Discourse given October 8, 1854

George Q. Cannon, member of the First Presidency, said that Joseph Smith plays a pivotal role in the salvation plan. "If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by him; if we enter into our glory, it will be through the authority that he has received" (Gospel Truth, pp. 199, 200).

LDS President Harold B. Lee who said, "Many have belittled Joseph Smith, but those who have will be forgotten in the remains of mother earth, and the odor of their infamy will ever be with them, but honor, majesty, and fidelity to God, exemplified by Joseph Smith and attached to his name, will never die" (ibid., pg. 23).

July 13, 1862, Young declared, "...he that confesseth not that Jesus has come in the flesh and sent Joseph Smith with the fulness of the Gospel to this generation, is not of God, but is anti-christ" (JOD 9:312).

[aMorePerfectUnion]

"Hey DU, if the mormon god feels these should be scripture - let your mormon god tell your prophet. Otherwise it is a non-starter and just another mormon assault on the integrity of the bible."

Godzilla, you are right of course, but I have a suggestion to make your post even more accurate...

"Hey DU, if one of the mormon gods feels these should be scripture - let that mormon god tell your prophet. Otherwise it is a non-starter and just another mormon assault on the integrity of the bible."

Never forget, and I know you don't, that mormonism has 4 Earth Gods (and maybe more). And millions, billions or trillions of other gods.

[Elsie]

You go now, you eat too much!

Louie is great!

[Elsie]

I know Jim Robinson really hurt you Saundra ...

It mattereth not; as it is only a flesh wound.

What IS going to hurt you two is when Joseph Smith asks WHY you have not entered into polygamous relationships; even after Brigham had WARNed you.

Now THAT is going to hurt!

Why; you guys will be associating with Jack MORMONs and murderers!

Maybe even some protestants and Catholics; too!

[Elsie]

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;

and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,

and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.

Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)

[Elsie]

Never forget, and I know you don't, that mormonism has 4 Earth Gods (and maybe more). And millions, billions or trillions of other gods.

---

(click)

Praise to the Man!

 

 

 

Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
Jesus annointed that Prophet and Seer.
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Praise to his mem'ry, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assasins,
Plead unto heav'n while the earth lauds his fame.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven;
Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know 'Brother Joseph' again.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

[Colofornian]

(Svcw to Delphi User): You say: Mormons do not worship Joseph Smith

Maybe not but according to your leaders (lds) jesus is secondary to Joseph Smith.

Well, consider this September 2007 piece from the Mormon blog, Times & Seasons -- written by a then current Mormon: Praising the Man.

The Times & Season Mormon piece, written by Kaimi Wenger, goes beyond Elz' quote of the lyrics of the Mormon hymn sung to Joseph Smith in post #714...

Wenger writes:

“No, we don’t worship Joseph Smith,” I explained to the investigator. “We respect him as a prophet.”

“You mean, like Mohamed?” he asked.

“No, more like Moses, or John the Baptist.”

It was a standard comparison that I had used repeatedly on my mission. Joseph Smith is just a prophet. He’s just like John the Baptist, or Moses, or Peter, James, and John.

Of course, there are a few problems with that characterization, aren’t there?

Chief among them — if Joseph Smith is really just like John the Baptist, then why don’t we treat the two similarly? And despite doctrinal protests, we really don’t.

In the current hymnal, there are no hymns about Moses. None about John the Baptist (though Jesus’s baptism is referenced a few times). A few cursory mentions of Peter, in places like What Was Witnessed (#11), and implied mention in #105, Master the Tempest is Raging. There are some mentions of Adam — more than any other Biblical prophet, probably — as well as Enoch.

In contrast, we get two very well-known, oft-sung hymns focusing directly on Joseph Smith: Praise to the Man, and Oh How Lovely was the Morning. Prior hymnals contained many more: The Seer; Blest was the Day when the Prophet and Seer; O Give me Back my Prophet; and so on.

The same goes for church art. The average church building might have pictures of Joseph Smith alone; of the First Vision; of the priesthood restoration; of translation. The Gospel Art kit reflects this. It contains ten pictures of Joseph Smith. There are six pictures of Jesus’ apostles, four pictures of Moses, Lehi, and Nephi, and three each of Adam and Daniel...

ALL: Read the lyrics in Elz' post #714...then tell us if they don't offer DIRECT praise to Joseph Smith, as the very title of the hymn tells us so plainly!!!

[Tennessee Nana]

The bible is not everything God said, nor does it completely agree with itself. (Judas’ death for example)
___________________________________________

Oh thats right ...

Mormons believe that Joey Smith is a direct descendant of various Bible characters...

Judas no doubt is one of those ancestors...

and like his ignoble descendant, Joey, Judas Smith also no doubt was a martyr, murdered by a mob of anti-Judas Smithians..

Judas had 2 swords smuggled into his dungeon of course...

and killed a couple of those dasardly apostates as he broke out of the unguarded dungeon, calling on Jupiter, the family god...

Yeah thats how it must have happened...

[Colofornian]

IN my last post, I closed out: ALL: Read the lyrics in Elz' post #714...then tell us if they don't offer DIRECT praise to Joseph Smith, as the very title of the hymn tells us so plainly!!!

Consider this about the author of that praise hymn to Joseph Smith. W.W. Phelps penned that song of glorifying Smith, promising in it at one point that: "millions shall know Brother Joseph again."

INSTEAD of focusing on MILLIONS coming to know Jesus Christ -- Mormons sing this hymn with these words toward and about Joseph Smith!!!

But the key isn't to know Joseph Smith! Rather it's to know Jesus Christ!

A BYU published article highlighting the annual third week of December Utah State sermons focusing on Joseph Smith mentioned how: "Many...Smith memorial speakers emphasized the need for all those present to obtain this personal witness of Joseph Smith....Joseph Smith lies at the heart of it all..."
Source: “Praise To The Man”: A Review Of The Annual Joseph Smith Memorial Sermons [Mormon Merry Smithmas]

Aren't we to have a personal testimony of Jesus Christ and not Joseph Smith?

Didn't Jesus say even the Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus (NOT Joseph):

“When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify ABOUT ME." (Jesus, speaking of the Holy Spirit, John 15:26)

And yet one of those Mormon Memorial speakers at Utah State claimed "Joseph lies at the heart of it all."

Wow! Here we thought Jesus was the One who lied at the heart of it all!

On Dec. 22, 2008, the Mormon church owned Deseret News had this Joseph Smith glorifying article...Note this brief excerpt when it discussed Lds "prophet" Thomas Monson: ...he's always appreciated the fact that Joseph Smith was born in the season in which we celebrate the birth of Christ... And at this season, he's happy that our thoughts can be drawn to JOSEPH SMITH. "He gave us everything."
Source: 'Praise to the Man' honors Joseph Smith

So...Joseph Smith 'gave us EVERYTHING'??? Really? Isn't Jesus Christ the ONE who "gave us everything?" Shouldn't our thoughts be focused on Him this Christmas season?

[Colofornian]

Here we thought Jesus was the One who lied at the heart of it all!

Ah, bad grammar on my part: Should be: Here we thought Jesus was the One who lays at the heart of it all!

[Tennessee Nana]

he has not spent much time searching and studying the scripture I know ...

even those of us who have don’t know everything

Resty, 12/03/2012 4:46:45 PM PST

[Colofornian]

IN my last posts, I have encouraged all to read the lyrics in Elz' post #714...

Notice these lines from that praise song sung to Joseph Smith:

Kings shall extol him, and nations revere....Great is his glory and endless his priesthood. (“Praise to the Man,” Hymns, no. 27)

Kings extol a "prophet" (NOT Jesus Christ?)
Nations revere a "prophet" (NOT Jesus Christ?)
Great is his glory? (Joseph Smith's? NOT Jesus Christ?)

Yup. Worship as sheer audacious usurpation of Jesus Christ!!!