You spittle, “ I would love to have at least one civil conversation with someone on this forum… but I doubt it will ever happen. “ There are many non-Christians who will stroke your cultic mind enough. But you are a lost cult follower of a man who was a serial adulterer, a false prophet, a congenital liar, a thief, and a blasphemer. Don’t expect Christians to embrace your false religion, even as they pray for your doomed soul!
What shallow, logically fallacious reasoning! Sharing racial attributes does not translate into either equality of character nor necessarily into sanction of a shared practice, and not being a respecter of persons refers to not treating men based on their race/color/nationality - as the LDS did regarding blacks - versus faith and character. Muhammad was also a man and polygamist, but which does not justify his manner of polygamy and doctrine any more than it does Smith's based on a basic shared aspect with Abraham. Absurd.
Or is it your conclusion that God can command a prophet to have more than one wife? Or any man for that matter…
God could allow this and did, but why do you continue to persist in arguing as if I argued contrary to what i clearly denied, "as i nowhere called or argued that Smith was carnal because he was a polygamist. His carnality is abundantly evidenced besides his manner of polygamy, while God always was God, and is not a product of eternal progression, with multiple wives."
Why the little digs? It’s a sign of weakness…seriously… “Elitist Smith” does that make you feel better or something?
It is not some little dig, but a rebuke of your foundational argument, that Smith was a prophet of God, yet who asserts that all the churches were wrong and all their creeds were an abomination to God, and Smith was the thus the elitist restoratationist, which necessitated a new revelation and papal-like assertions. The distinctive similarities of errors to Rome do not stop there.
I would love to have at least one civil conversation with someone on this forum… but I doubt it will ever happen.
When you argue for a elitist church whose words are as Scripture but which fundamentally contradicted it, then you are the one being as arrogant as many RCs here. And as the owner himself has stated that Joe Smith was a false prophet and his book is false gospel does not want it taught on FR as gospel, then you can call him arrogant as well.
I have no doubt that Joseph contradicted the meaning you project on scripture.
Then you must demonstrate how it is a projection, verses what Scripture actually teaches.
In everything, God dictates His will to man. God will never accept the will of man given to God. The books of the Bible were mainly written by prophets under the direction of God. However, the list of books that were accepted to be in the Bible was a product of men. There were no prophets present when the Bible was compiled. It is man dictating to God what scripture should be.
Rather, the very texts which the Lord Jesus and NT church invoked were discerned and progressively established as being of God, as was further revelation as complementary and conflative, where wannabe additional "revelations" by wannabe additional "prophets such as Muhammad and Smith stand in clear contradiction to that of the prior revelation they invoke to give authority to their own.
And as a result, you have that absolute chaos that is called “Christianity”.
WRONG. The divisions are not due to different Bibles, except to some degree with Catholicism, but are mainly due to elitist heads, or liberal views of Scripture, while those who hold most strongly to the authority of the Bible as the accurate, wholly inspired word of God are the most unified major religious group in basic beliefs. Groups such the Watchtower society and the LDS have stronger unified due to unScriptural cultic allegiance to leadership, and which have been historically reproved by evangelicals due to commitment to the shared beliefs of the latter.
I don’t know, like grabbing up some poor traveling preacher and throwing him down concrete stairs… or baptizing babies, sprinkling for baptism, ordaining women, thinking you’re already saved, marrying homosexuals, pedophile priests, etc… on and on…
All of which are exposed as contrary to Scripture by evangelicals here, as have the demonic deceptions of Mormonism.
God however, knowing all things, had His prophets compile other books of scripture. This would be a sign of the true Church of God.
Conversely, contradicting the Scriptures (and itself) it even professed to be of God was and is a sign of a false church.
The Book of Mormon together with the Bible and living prophets have perfect continuity.
Which is another bombastic assertion. Dream on.
How is that Jesus had to be anointed by God to do these things? What was He before He was anointed?
What desperation! This was in regards to His commission on earth, in which the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world, and is no way contrary to Christ being the Divine Son of God from eternity, (Mic. 5:2) as God is, (which is His position by nature, but who took upon the nature of Abraham. And who taught that God is a Spirit, (John 4:24) the essential nature of which is not that of flesh bones. (Lk. 24:49)
Your spurious over-use of the words “fallacious and absurd” is both tedious and tiresome.
Because they are entirely repeatedly fitting.
If you expect an answer to a question, then ask it as a question and not as a rhetorical response to a question of mine.
So "Do you really think you can equate Joseph Smith to Abraham? Do you???" is merely rhetorical, while "do you also believe Abraham was a carnal prophet who is in Hell?" is not?
Your arrogance in calling me a fool has really taken away any desire to continue conversing with you…
Such liberal recourse does not change the facts.