Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Our Mormon Brothers? Part 5 [The King Follett Discourse]
Reformed Evangelist ^ | June 16th, 2007 | James White

Posted on 08/28/2007 4:29:33 PM PDT by Gamecock

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

1 posted on 08/28/2007 4:29:35 PM PDT by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; irishtenor; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe
Our Mormon Brothers? Part I
Our Mormon Brothers? Part II
Our Mormon Brothers? Part III
Our Mormon Brothers? Part IV
2 posted on 08/28/2007 4:35:42 PM PDT by Gamecock ("Peace if possible, truth at all costs." Luther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; irishtenor; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; Enosh
I haven't had much time to read these until last night. I noticed Enosh referenced a video on Part I that succiently detailed the Mormon's beliefs. Excellent Cartoon banned by the Mormon church. My wife and I were flabbergasted.
3 posted on 08/29/2007 11:20:49 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


4 posted on 08/29/2007 7:40:53 PM PDT by TheDon (The DemocRAT party is the party of TREASON! Overthrow the terrorist's congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

I suppose, if you can read with an unprejudiced mind, that the Holy Bible backs the Prophet Joseph Smith and leaves the mainstream “christian-greek philosophy” apostasy in the dust, eh?

Elohim is often referred to in the scriptures as “The Most High God”.


5 posted on 08/30/2007 2:19:34 PM PDT by Old Mountain man (Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; colorcountry; FastCoyote; MHGinTN; Pan_Yans Wife; svcw; Enosh; Elsie; ...

PING for another installment


6 posted on 08/30/2007 5:09:21 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Different denominations do not save you. The Blood of Jesus Christ does. Tex Pete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; whatisthetruth

Ping to an interesting series.


7 posted on 08/30/2007 5:10:24 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Different denominations do not save you. The Blood of Jesus Christ does. Tex Pete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Click Here

8 posted on 08/30/2007 5:12:56 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Different denominations do not save you. The Blood of Jesus Christ does. Tex Pete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

This cartoon, fairly characterized as “religious pornography”, has been soundly condemned by the National Conference of Christians and Jews (not a Mormon organization). In 1984, they issued the following statement:

“It makes extensive use of ‘half-truth,’ faulty generalizations, erroneous interpretations, and sensationalism. It is not reflective of the genuine spirit of the Mormon faith. We find particularly offensive the emphasis in the film that Mormonism is some sort of subversive plot—a danger to the community, a threat to the institution of marriage, and is destructive to the mental health of teenagers. All our experience with our Mormon neighbors provides eloquent refutation of these charges. We are of the opinion that The Godmakers relies heavily on appeals to fear, prejudice and other less worthy human emotions. . . . It appears to us to be a basically unfair and untruthful presentation of what Mormons really believe and practice.” (NCCJ 1984:3-4).


9 posted on 08/30/2007 6:29:06 PM PDT by Safford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Safford
I'm not familiar with the National Conference of Christians and Jews. Given the title I would say the "Christians" are probably anything but fundamentalists. Here is what I found in researching this with references:

I will say that these references are very consistent with the movie. It is extremely interesting that the Mormons do not specifically lists these beliefs that I could find but the references above are unmistakable. That means they either have changed their beliefs or they are hiding something.
10 posted on 08/30/2007 7:12:29 PM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl

Ping


11 posted on 08/30/2007 7:46:37 PM PDT by MHGinTN (You've had life support. Promote life support for those in the womb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
I haven't had much time to read these until last night. I noticed Enosh referenced a video on Part I that succiently detailed the Mormon's beliefs. Excellent Cartoon banned by the Mormon church. My wife and I were flabbergasted.

What made the LDS Church think it could ban a most excellent cartoon that is available to all on the Internet? Even the Church's ninja-like assassins, the Danites, cannot possibly get to everyone who has an Internet connection.

And why would the LDS Church want to ban this excellent cartoon? Those who made must be frightfully well informed about Mormonism, perhaps even more knowledgeable about what Mormons really believe than the Mormons themselves. And the cartoon's producers are obviously extremely generous souls, selflessly spending their own time and money to help the LDS Church spread its message.

No wonder you were flabbergasted.

12 posted on 08/30/2007 7:57:31 PM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

graven image?


13 posted on 08/30/2007 8:12:40 PM PDT by colorcountry (Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry

Bump for reading after the weekend


14 posted on 09/01/2007 4:31:59 PM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Different denominations do not save you. The Blood of Jesus Christ does. Tex Pete)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Thanks for the ping. I’ve been trying to keep up on the installments.


15 posted on 09/04/2007 5:00:01 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; Safford
Ed Decker creator of Godmakers beat his wife and committed adultery. He was excommunicated from the church for that not for "doctrinal differences" as he claims. He later lied and claimed that he never commited adultery and didn't beat his wife even though he signed the court papers that said he did.

His portrayal of Mormons is so full of lies and outlandish that other "Fundamentalist anti-mormons" condemened him. Jerald and Sandra Tanner are anti-mormon themselves but recognized how Decker's lies hurt their position.

16 posted on 09/05/2007 11:16:30 AM PDT by Rameumptom (Gen X= they killed 1 in 4 of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rameumptom

You need to take your face out of your hat and get a life. Old Joe was a charlatan, plain and simple. Do a little OBJECTIVE research (and forget about your burning bosom) and you might save yourself.


17 posted on 09/05/2007 11:56:50 AM PDT by nesnah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nesnah
>>Do a little OBJECTIVE research (and forget about your burning bosom)

I have met Ed Decker's first wife. As a former cop I have nothing but disdain for cowardly wife beaters.

Here's a little research for you.

Decker's work has attracted criticism not only from Latter-day Saints,[2] but also from religious scholars of other faiths,[3] as well as other critics of the Mormon faith.[4] Decker's former associate, Dick Baer said that, "Ed has a penchant to sensationalize, embellish on facts and center on bizarre issues to try to shock people."(February 25th 1993, Salt Lake Tribune). Jerald and Sandra Tanner and Bob Passantino have said that his writings grossly misrepresent Mormonism, and thereby dilute his message and offend Mormons without attracting them to evangelical Christianity. The Tanners, themselves prominent critics of the LDS Church, have noted what they contend are inaccuracies and errors in some of Decker's works.[5] When Decker was denounced by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, he went so far as to accuse them of being in the pay of the LDS Church and even of being "demonized" themselves. Decker and his associates offered to exorcise the Tanners' demons, and expressed great sadness when they refused.[6]

Critics also point to Decker's first wife's allegations that he was excommunicated for adultery and wife abuse - contrary to his claim that it was due to changes in Decker's religious beliefs. This allegation has been denied by Decker but appears in court documents that he did not dispute at the time of his divorce.[1] Decker has since remarried.

The actual Decker excommunication record is on file at Utah State University Special Collections Library [#210] [citation needed]

18 posted on 09/05/2007 12:10:14 PM PDT by Rameumptom (Gen X= they killed 1 in 4 of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Rameumptom; Safford; nesnah

I assume Ed Decker is the maker of the cartoon posted in #3. This cartoon is consistent with the writings posted in #10 which is some of the historical doctrine of the LDS.

What I find intriguing is the effort to either change this doctrine or to obviscate it. If you go to the LDS website they state they believe in the atonement, Godhead, etc. Their doctrine sounds positively fundamental. Yet if you dig deeper into the meaning of these doctrines it shows that when they talk about these fundamental beliefs they clearly mean something that is totally alien to Christianity. The atonement means something completely different that the Christian atonement. They are not very forthcoming in my mind.

Do you believe that God the Father lives on a distant planet? Do you believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?


19 posted on 09/05/2007 12:15:40 PM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rameumptom

I never have seen “Godmakers”, nor do I care to. I really do not care about Decker, or what he has done.

But, let’s play along with your logic: So, if a man is convicted of wife-beating, then he is wrong about everything, eh?

What if a man is convicted of “disorderly conduct” and being a “glass-looker”?

Where exactly were Old Joe’s brothers and sisters sleeping the night of those spirit visitations? Were they at a slumber party with the neighbors down the street? That cabin they lived in at the time was SMALL. So, why didn’t anyone else in Old Joe’s family see or hear anything?


20 posted on 09/05/2007 12:15:49 PM PDT by nesnah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson