Posted on 11/25/2015 10:50:25 AM PST by damonw
POST IS TOO LONG TO POST ALL HERE - A F.A.I.R. Mormon Apologist by the name of CC (CleanCut) submitted a response to ALL 17 of the claims in this post 17 Little Known Facts About the Mormons
What follows is,,,
1. the 17 facts as stated by Challengemin.org
2. CCs comments. (You see CCs original comments for verification on the above post comments section)
3. my (Damons) counter comments.
FACT #1 The Mormon Church teaches ALL other Churches are WRONG; ALL their creeds are an ABOMINATION in the sight of God; and ALL their teachers are corrupt.
One of the Mormon Books of Scripture, The Pearl of Great Price, says this about non-LDS churches: ⦠they were ALL WRONG and the Personage who addressed me said that ALL their creeds were an ABOMINATION in his sight; that those professors were ALL CORRUPT.(Joseph Smith 2:19).
____________________________________
CC: The truth about this fact is that The LDS Church teaches that all churches have some truth, just not the fullness of the truth. This particular quote refers to the creeds of the churches that we believe are wrong, but not that all the individual Christians who follow them are wrong in their sincere desire to follow Christ the best they know how.
DAMON: Mormonism is built on the First visions of Joseph Smith. And while there are 3 contradictory accounts of this First Vision, they all agree in making the false assertion that Christianity is apostate and an abomination to God. Mormonism has this in common with all churchs (Christian cults) that started from Campbells Restoration Movement.
This post shows what Mormon leaders have always said, and still do say about Christianity. AND IT AINT NICE
So Joel Osteen says Mormons are Christians, But what do Mormons say about Christianity?
(Excerpt) Read more at discerningsounddoctrine.wordpress.com ...
When lds says “Christ”, they are NOT talking about the eternal Christ, they are talking about a guy who became Christ, just like their God, who was once a man.
People believe in this lds Christ are not Christians.
Only about 15% of lds have TRs, so probably not.
ð
Really?
Have you ever seen lds vote for?
They don’t murder the body.
I’m sorry.
Interesting post, VM. I would obviously fall into category B, but I don’t have much interest in trying to prove my point via debate or argument.
Personally I am convinced, but each person needs to seek light and knowledge themselves from the Source of truth. “
“Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find”
Dear elsie,
Lady, I ain’t no stinking mormon. Period.
In response to:
“How many of you Mormons posting here are going to TERRESTIAL?
With the rest of us ‘christians’?? “
I was a messianic lay pastor in training.\
dear elsie,
re:
“I want to extend TRUE happiness towards them!
The JOY of the Lord; not the yoke of MormonISM.”
Good. Mazel tov. Why not get a bicycle, and take it to THEIR doorstep, like they do to everybody else?
I just posted it to EVERYONE who had already been pinged to this thread.
Sometimes a Mormon will actually address what LDS Prophets, Leaders, Movers and Shakers have said.
Sadly; not enough Christians are well versed in what they are supposed to believe.
Not to worry; as there are other ways of getting through to them.
The BEST way is when they REALLY are upset at one or more of us 'gentiles' and dig into their history on their own; trying to prove us wrong.
Thanks; Al Gore; for inventing the Internet!
Thanks; SLC; for keeping such good records; too.
The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints © 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. Rights and use information. Privacy policy. |
Good method, for those worthy enough to employ it. I don't count myself there yet. Maybe someday. Probably by the second coming. Choice "C" is the obvious option for those of us still waiting.
Among other things, I've got to stop calling the gutter trash as gutter trash. But I can't help myself anymore than they can help themselves on forever attacking those who pick choice "A" or "B".
dear elsie,
Point well taken.
OBTW, I have an ‘internetizen’ (if that is a coined term or not), since the days of the ARPAnet, and a charter member of a NY ‘bbs’, when it bought a connection to the DARPAnet, before the days of ‘www’.
One man's trash is another's treasure.
HMMMmmm...
Interesting compartmentalization on two fronts: (a) The word "they" -- as to who is represented by "they"; and (b) Why don't you give the same "corporate identity" to Christians like Elsie as you apparently do Mormons???
Allow me to explain:
Ya know, 95% of the Mormons lads & lassies who come to your door are aged 18, 19, 20. A few "ticks" %-wise are 21-23. The rest -- perhaps 3% at best -- are older.
Yet even tho the overwhelming % of Mormons who come to your door are either teens or barely 20...we don't see you telling the alcoholic eligibles within Mormondom (21 & over crowd) to "get a bicycle, & take it to" others' "doorsteps, like...everybody else." Why not?
Well, the "why not" is that you apparently accept the notion of representation: These 21 & over Mormons are -- apparently in your mind -- represented by their younger lot who act as door-to-door "peddle" pushers.
So, let's reverse that, shall we? I know of at least one specific Christian group -- and I'm sure many others exist or who've made the rounds in the past -- those who've been door-to-door-stepping within Mormon-ornamented Utah County...home of BYU...just over the previous two years.
Yet, apparently you don't grant Elsie the same principle of "door to door" via representation that you seemingly accord older Mormons?
Do you see the obvious double-standard here? Mormon adults are not seen as sitting on their duffs because other Mormons represent them door-to-door; yet those Christians who DO go door-to-door in Utah don't (in your mind) represent other Christians who aren't ringing doorbells in Utah.
Tell us: Why the double standard here?
#1...Vigilanteman, may I remind you that the word "trinity" actually has a specific basic meaning: "tri" = 3; "nity" as a contracted word for "unity."
Christianity doesn't deny the "tri" of the trinity: It actually teaches a tri-personal God!
#2...then for you to conclude that the tri-personal reality of God = plural "entities"...you've now crossed into the realm of polytheism, which any clear plain reading of the entirety of the Bible is NOT Judeo-Christian.
Finally, #3, let's compare all this to a parallel teaching of Jesus Himself, shall we? Note ESPECIALLY the highlighted below:
Matthew 19:
4 âHavenât you read,â he replied, âthat at the beginning the Creator âmade them male and female,â 5 and said, âFor this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be UNITed to his wife, and the two WILL BECOME ONE fleshâ? 6 So they are NO LONGER TWO, BUT ONE flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.â
I can just imagine, you, Vigilanteman in the crowd...listening to Jesus as He's proclaiming Matthew 19:
"Sorry, Jesus. I've seen men and women. Separate entities. All of 'em. How dare you call them 'one.' How dare you say, 'they are NO LONGER TWO!' Of course, they're two! They're 'separate entities' I tell you! Separate!"
So, Vigilanteman: Are you claiming that a husband and wife is more "one" than God the Father & His Son? Really?
All on the basis of your strange "logic"???
Tell us Teppe, what's wrong with the Apostles Creed?
Please be specific.
Joseph Smith, in his "first vision" later made into Mormon "scripture" placed on the same par with the Bible, claimed there that "ALL" Christian creeds were "an abomination in His sight" -- the sight, that is, of the unnamed entities who appeared to Smith.
Why do Mormons deem the Apostles Creed to be an "abomination" Teppe?
Can ANY Mormon tell us specifically what's so "abominable" about the Apostles Creed?
I have Joseph Smith's "JST" (Joseph Smith 'Translation' of the Bible), which BTW, isn't a "translation" at all as Smith knew very, very, very, very little Hebrew or Greek. IoW, it's an editing hatchet job, coupled with a weak attempt on a few verses to try to develop a "running commentary" by ADDING some words to change or add to the meaning as stated in those verses.
Now, when we turn to the book of Revelation in the JST, we see, for example, that in Revelation 1:4-5, Joseph Smith ADDED a LOT of words just to those two verses alone! Compared to the KJV, Smith added 22 words to Rev. 1:4 & another dozen words to Rev. 1:5...That's 34 words in just two verses!
By your very own admission -- J.A. -- where you said: "Anyone who ADDS TO...the Book of Revelations is condemned to suffer the plagues mentioned in that book."
Smith did exactly that!
At other places in the book of Revelation, Smith did exactly what you said would be problematic, JA: Smith "took away" the river reference, for example, in Rev. 9:14 in his "JST" version of the Bible. Rev. 9:1 references "bottomless pit" -- so Smith decided to extrapolate "bottomless pit" from v. 1, took away "River Euphrates" in v. 14 -- and replaced it with "bottomless pit" in v. 14.
How is a river a "bottomless pit?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.