Jesus is Lord? Hewitt, Mormonism and Bigotry

Townhall.com ^ | June 3, 2007 | Frank Pastore

[Elsie]

Yep, for people to stop saying things that are provably untrue....

Do you REALLY want to go here?

[Elsie]

Easy, stop calling me a liar, and accept what I say I believe.

You may be a bit confused here.

It appears to me that the LDS organization is the object being 'attacked'.

We 'accept' that you do believe what they espouse, and do not think you to be a liar when you repeat what they have printed.

---

It's understandable that when the head is under fire, the extremities tend to share it's pain.

[Elsie]

And lastly, before you or anyone else posts something about a religion on this forum, think about if anyone might just feel Ike you were attacking them, if they could, rephrase it so it's and opinion, and you should be fine.

 

Good advice...

 

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/

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

  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all ^awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those ^bprofessors were all ^ccorrupt; that: “they ^ddraw near to me with their lips, but their ^ehearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the ^fcommandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the ^gpower thereof.”

  20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself ^alying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, ^bmother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” 

 

 

 

 
 

[aMorePerfectUnion]

BibChr,

Christianity is monotheistic, as you know. The belief in
ONLY one God. Mormonism believes in many gods - unlimited,
since they are manufacturing more each day. This is polytheism. Not a Christian belief. It woefully fails the
test of monotheism. Game over.

You’ve got spunk boy! I like that.

best to you,
ampu

[BibChr]

That’s right; and the issue of “how many true gods?” is not like “sprinkle? or dunk?” or “one pastor? or many?” It’s fundamental. It’s definitional.

At that level, saying “unorthodox Christian” is like saying “square circle.” It’s a lying word-game.

And I get the impression that, thought Mormons are some of the very nicest people I’ve ever known, this particular deceptive dishonesty must be a cultic requirement.

[MHGinTN]

Dan, it is also a peculiarity of Mormonism to claim to be not just a sect of Christianity but THE ONLY RESTORED Authority of Christianity, yet the adherents who act as forum apologists for this cult try to argue both ways, that they are an also Christian sect just not traditional orthodoxy and yet the only god-authorized Christianity 'in these latter days'.

This duplicitous spittle spills over into their lines of reasoning, quoting many of the early Church teachers and historians yet denying these people lived under Apostolic Authority so they ought not have any credibility yet they are the stones with which the Mormonism Apologists build their specious arguments. It isn't likely such an apologist is able to comprehend the depth of dishonesty inherent in such shenanigans, therefore he/she must take personal offense when the ‘ism’ is discredited as a cult.

[BibChr]

Another very good point.

Perhaps the point of their requiring every Mormon to lie. If you brainwash all your adherents into believing that all purported medicines are the same, they’re inoculating against even thinking clearly about real medicine.

[DelphiUser]

You Said: You fail the honesty test. Further discussion is pointless.

LOL! You disagree with me on something, therefore you are dishonest, therefore you should stop posting immediately!, again, LOL!

I answered you completely honestly, honest.

You Said: The “how many gods” question is fundamental. The Bible says A, you say B; the faiths are not reconcilable. Say there are 47519 gods if you like, just don’t say you are, in any sense, Christian.

Actually, the Bibles says A, I say B you Say C.

I do not believe any man can completely comprehend Gods' power or Glory, but now we are getting back to belief.

I can find plenty of scriptures in the Bible that when I read them they support my position, my perspective. (the key here is is when I read them, my interpretation, my thoughts) You can also, find plenty of scriptures that support your beliefs because you are reading them with your perspective, and your interpretation, and your thoughts. For you to say (metaphorically here) "You do not have my interpretation of the scriptures, therefore you are wrong, dishonest, and not a Christian) is not going to work because it is visibly a flawed argument.

I would rather have a friend, neighbor, president who believes in ultimate accountability, has his beliefs and lives according to them, than a man of my own church who does not live what he preaches.

I, try to live what I preach. I am however, not perfect, appearances to the contrary not withstanding (do you guys get humor?)

I have been judged on this very forum, most recently by you for telling what I truly believe, which disagrees with what you believe, so you call me a liar, rather than admit that from my perspective, I just might be telling the truth, for to admit that, you would have to admit that there was such a perspective, and that it seems those who attack Mormons just will not admit that we might be Both honest, and have a perspective from which the scriptures also make sense.

I am not asking you to agree with us. But I am pointing out the illogic of your demand that we align ourselves with a group of men who met three hundred and twenty five years after Jesus ascended to heaven to vote on the nature of God, in order to be Christian. Orthodoxy boils down to consensus. I do not believe that the nature of God is up for a vote.

Anyway, I hope you have a nice day, and I pray to God that you will be blessed.

[DelphiUser]

I said: Yep, for people to stop saying things that are provably untrue....

You Said: Do you REALLY want to go here?

Sure, I have been down the "We can prove that Joeps, or Brigham or Moromons..." excavations, they are all dry holes once you have the right perspective, but if you want to waste time drilling in one, no one is going to stop you.

What is your deal anyway, you sometimes post "With the Mormons" and sometimes "against". You speak of having your book of mormon beside your computer keyboard, but that is not exactly "Standard Anti operating procedure".

So, what's your story?

(Curiosity killed the cat, but I got away with minor injuries).

Cheers

[DelphiUser]

I said: Easy, stop calling me a liar, and accept what I say I believe.

You Said: You may be a bit confused here.

Well, it has happened before, so I will not rule it out.

You Said: It appears to me that the LDS organization is the object being 'attacked'.

So, if I attack Women, or better yet all those called Elsie, are you not going to feel attacked? you should.

You Said: We 'accept' that you do believe what they espouse, and do not think you to be a liar when you repeat what they have printed.

I wish that all here shared your sentiment, I also wish they would stop judging another culture by their own standards, for that is really what is happening here.

In Taiwan, one of the things that frustrated missionaries form many western religions is that chinese philosophy teaches that conflicting truths can still be true, so according to their philosophy I can believe my God to be all powerful, and my Taoist friend can believe his Deceased Grand father is all powerful, I can state my belief and he will agree with me, that to me my God is all powerful and then tell me his Grandfather is all powerful and will expect me to agree with him for to him it is true. he will see no conflict, for it is all (to him) a matter of our differing perspectives.

It took me a while to figure out how to teach in that environment, and I think Many who are opposing us simply need to accept that we have a different perspective, not join us, just see us as we truly are, perhaps that is too much.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: And lastly, before you or anyone else posts something about a religion on this forum, think about if anyone might just feel Ike you were attacking them, if they could, rephrase it so it's and opinion, and you should be fine.

You Said: Good advice...

Which is why I do not have that quote for my tag line. I only post that in response to people who are misquoting it.

I could complain to every member of every church about something, but I have more important things to do.

I have yet to find a church that teaches that it is false.

There are many who claim to be true, I don't let that bother me either.

Why do you?

[Elsie]

I do not believe any man can completely comprehend Gods' power or Glory, but now we are getting back to belief.

Ok...

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

[Elsie]

But I am pointing out the illogic of your demand that we align ourselves with a group of men who met three hundred and twenty five years after Jesus ascended to heaven to vote on the nature of God, in order to be Christian.

And you guys, conversly, want us to believe that ONE man, two hundred years ago, got it right while GOD let error progate thru His church for 1800 years.

Which is more logical??

---

 

 

Deuteronomy 19:15
   One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

 

Matthew 18:16
   But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that `every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'

 

2 Corinthians 13:1
  This will be my third visit to you. "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."

 

1 Timothy 5:19
   Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.

 

Hebrews 10:28
  Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

[Elsie]

...they are all dry holes once you have the right perspective...

Translation: the LDS organizations 'explanation'.

---

What is your deal anyway, you sometimes post "With the Mormons" and sometimes "against".

What's so hard to figure out?

When you guys are right on a subject; I agree.

When your organizations output disagrees which what has been accepted for 1800 years (and longer); I'll disagree.

[Elsie]

I wish that all here shared your sentiment, I also wish they would stop judging another culture by their own standards, for that is really what is happening here.

Are you saying that all 'cultures' have equal value?

The starting Mormons HAD the SAME culture.

What was the reason they were judged then?

---

In Taiwan, one of the things that frustrated missionaries form many western religions is that chinese philosophy teaches that conflicting truths can still be true, so according to their philosophy I can believe my God to be all powerful, and my Taoist friend can believe his Deceased Grand father is all powerful, I can state my belief and he will agree with me, that to me my God is all powerful and then tell me his Grandfather is all powerful and will expect me to agree with him for to him it is true. he will see no conflict, for it is all (to him) a matter of our differing perspectives.

I see that PCness has been around a LONG time!

[Elsie]

I have yet to find a church that teaches that it is false.

Huh?

What is 'it'??

[DelphiUser]

I said: I do not believe any man can completely comprehend Gods' power or Glory, but now we are getting back to belief.

You said: Ok...
Romans 1:20

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

So, your contention is since we have seen some of his power we have seen all of it?

I honestly believe that if I was able to spend the rest of my lifetime reviewing God's glory (that would be the way to go, you know?) I would not make a dent for they are "endless" and unmeasurable, while my life span is not endless and unmeasurable

I think you had to try to misunderstand my statement.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: But I am pointing out the illogic of your demand that we align ourselves with a group of men who met three hundred and twenty five years after Jesus ascended to heaven to vote on the nature of God, in order to be Christian.

You Said: And you guys, conversely, want us to believe that ONE man, two hundred years ago, got it right while GOD let error propagate through His church for 1800 years.

God's ways are not our ways...
Isa. 55: 8-9

8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

You Said: Which is more logical??

Since you are asking me, I will say what I believe is more logical since from my perspective it is, besides the apostasy was prophesied by the apostles:
2 Thes. 2: 3

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

You are free to believe the opposite if it makes you feel better, I will not tell you you are not a Christian because of it.

You Quoted: Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

JST Deuteronomy 19:15

One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

You Quoted: Matthew 18:16

But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that `every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

JST >Matthew 18:16

16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

You Quoted: 2 Corinthians 13:1

This will be my third visit to you. "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."

JST 2 Corinthians 13:1

This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

You Quoted: 1 Timothy 5:19

Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.

JST 1 Timothy 5:19

Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.

You Quoted: Hebrews 10:28

Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

JST Hebrews 10:28

He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

For some reason the scriptures you quoted just looked funny, then i saw you were not using the KJV, what translation are you using and is there a web based link?

That said, the differences are minor and all bolster that need to Every word to be established in two or three witnesses mouths, like the Bible and the Book of Mormon.

What was your point in posting these again?

[DelphiUser]

Translation: the LDS organizations 'explanation'.

I thought we were not supposed to "Translate" each others speech anymore.

When your organizations output disagrees which what has been accepted for 1800 years (and longer); I'll disagree.

Tell me, is it the 1800 years, or is it what is accurate that you are after?

I personally love digging around on the Catholic enclyclopedia online, would you accept that as evidence of waht was believed 1800 years ago, or not.

[DelphiUser]

JST should be KJV, Sorry...