Why so many LDS threads?

I am posting this on behalf of many LDS freepers. They will post their own 'signature' to this in the comments below. --- Some of you have noticed lately a lot of LDS (ie: Mormon) threads here on FR. I'm going to tell you why.

For many years there have been several active LDS freepers here. We post to all the forums on relevant issues, and were happy to have a site where conservative values were so openly welcomed.

Those conservative values include faith in God, and freedom of religion. We fully respect the rights of all posters to express their opinions and views on religious matters, even when people choose to use those rights to express criticism of our own faith. We also support the ideas embodied in FR rules against religion bashing. There is no need for hostility and there should be no room for bigotry on FR. Every religion has it's miracles and mysteries. Every faith has things in it that are not or can not be proven, and things that run contrary to what secular science would have us believe. Someone mature and confident in their own faith generally doesn't feel the need to belittle the faith of others.

We have, to the best of our ability, conducted ourselves with civility and dignity. We do not feel that that respect has been returned by some posters (putting it mildly).

When Mormon missionaries were murdered, the moderators were kept busy pulling jubilant posts off the thread. When Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her home, we contended for months with posters who appeared to be motivated by religious bigotry doing all they could to smear the family and accuse the father. Several posters openly admitted their religious motivation in opposing Mitt Romney and confessed that no matter how conservative any Mormon was, they would never vote for one for President of the USA. When the Pope died, I don't think any Mormon poster posted anything unkind, yet the thread about the passing of our President recently needed many comments removed.

Nearly every thread having any connection with Mormons, or Utah winds up being hijacked by anti-Mormon activists who copy and paste the same false accusations over and over even when it has been clearly and factually pointed out to them on multiple occasions that they are bearing false witness against our faith. Everything possible is done by these activists to make FR a hostile place for Mormons, and for at least some of them, bashing Mormonism is all they do here. Their most recent project is trying to blur the fact that the polygamous FLDS is a separate and distinct religion from ours, just as Lutherans are a separate and distinct religion from Catholicism.

In our opinion, such poster do a great disservice to FR and to their fellow freepers by spreading disinformation and promoting hostility towards a people known for walking the walk of conservative values.

Why the moderators here don't see the behavior of these anti-Mormon activists as religion bashing is a mystery to us, but it is the moderators call to make and we respect their right to do so. That doesn't mean we have to be passive however. We have all spent many hours refuting the accusations leveled at our faith, but these wind up buried deep in a flood of comments, effectively shouting us down.

Recently some of us have decided to take a more proactive approach. Rather than try to wrestle the pig into taking a bath, we are just going to hose it down. We will actively define our faith here rather than just respond to accusations.

So expect to see lots of Mormon threads, now and for as long as we see fit to keep posting them (although probably not as many as there are Catholic threads). They will be about our basic doctrines and responses to common accusations. If you want to know what our faith is about, read the articles we post. We will post them as open threads and I encourage you to compare the difference in tone and spirit between what we post and what our critics say.

I Said: That's funny, 2 Kings 15:20-22

U Said: Forgive me ... the reference should have been 1 Kings 22:20-22

I hate it when that happens...(to me, Grin)

I Said: You speak as one with little to no experience with the Holy Ghost, and for that I am truly sorry, ask It was not just a suggestion.

U Said: You are really not in a position to judge my experience with the Holy Spirit. I happen to believe that all believers in Christ are gifted with the presence and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is active in my life everyday.

I was not trying to judge you, merely your speech here, you spoke as if there was no revelation, not prompting, no communication from God and that, to me at least is a sad thing to even contemplate. I agree that all who believe experience the Spirit, I would say that the amount of "spirit" a person experiences varies with their closeness to Christ and their obedience to his commands.

I Said: Where we disagree is on the nature of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.

U Said: My point in this discussion is that we have been instructed by Jesus not to base our faith upon a sign, but upon the truth which we find in the Word of God.

But without his spirit it is impossible to know what is the word of God. "To him that hath ears to hear let him hear" was not just a cute phrase, There are some parts of the Bible that cannot be understood without that spirit. I dare say there are other inspired writings that did not make it into the Bible. Only with the Spirit of God can men discern as they have been commanded to do and ask and receive answers from him. Let me be perfectly clear, God testifies of all his words not just the Book of Mormon. It is just as valid to pray for a testimony of the Bible, in fact, I have and I got a similar answer to the one I got for the Book of Mormon. God simply answers prayers, isn't that wonderful?

U Said: Jesus described the ministry of the Holy Spirit among believers and He never said anything about the Holy Spirit warming the bosoms/hearts of believers as a sign of the truth of their belief.

The burning in the Bosom is a famous example because it's in the Bible, However, God will answer in a perfect way for every man, differently for every man, woman and Child that asks him, in way that is perfect for them, and because it is perfect for them, because it will testify of Jesus, they will know it is of God. U Said: In fact, Jesus said that the heart is deceitful above all things ... and desperately wicked. We should take care not to base our faith upon the feelings of our hearts.

You are right, we should base our faith on revelation from God.

U Said: As believers, we should strive for completeness and accuracy in our beliefs. A study of the ministry of the Holy Spirit would be beneficial for all believers.

I could not agree more, and what better way to start then by asking God, the source of all truth to testify of his words which you are studying.

Luke 11:9-13

9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

All I am asking people to do is ask, it's Biblical...

I Said: He did not “choose to die”, he fought for life, remember the gun you were just complaining about? I don’t know why I bother, you do not seem to be open to logic and reason.

U Said: Oh, yes he did..

From the multi million dollar Joseph Smith movie shown at the JS Memorial center.. Made and produced and sanctioned by the mormons at SLC..

Hyram Smith..They want us to go to Carthage..

Joe Smith.. Yes and if we go I will die..

So since he actually knew that..

Why did he go ??? And for what reason ???

Maybe because God wanted him to, maybe because his wife wanted him to, maybe because he had no choice, have you ever been to Nauvoo, or Carthage?

U Said: There is no mention of why he was arrested..

Joseph smith was arrested fro inciting a riot. The Riot happened outside of Nauvoo because some anti Mormons were upset that the City council had ordered the Nauvoo Expositor's press destroyed. I'm trying not to be too long winded here, but Joseph was promised by the Governor that if he surrendered himself, he would be protected, he knew better by the power of prophecy, yet he was supposed to go to his death, so he went.

U Said: Oh and there was NO gun in the movie...

There was when I saw it, they also talk about it in the Jail if you ever go to Carthage, take the tour...

U Said: And no extra wives in the movie ...no mention of polygamy at all..

They weren't at the jail, it'd have been real crowded...

U Said: And no tar and feathering in 1831 for seducing the Johnson girl

Marinda Nancy Johnson? LOL! Joseph never seduced her, and the tarring and feathering of which you speak was such a heinous act of illegal barbarity, I wonder that anyone would actually believe it was warranted for any reason, Joseph was not alone tarred and feathered, but several of the leaders of the church. If you can imagine the scene, Joseph is nursing a sick child (measles which is not as serious now, but without proper care it was deadly then.) on a bed, a mob stormed the house, and drug Joseph and the child out into the cold night, leaving the child on the ground, stripping Joseph and then applying hot tar to his body, then feathers, then they tried to choke him to death, then they tried to pour nitric acid in his mouth (which would have killed him) Joseph manages to pray for help, and the men hear an alarm being raised (there was no alarm) and abandon Joseph to scatter (like law abiding men every where do when caught obeying the law) Joseph finds his way home and finds his child dead from the exposure, I am shocked to hear you speaking of this event in glowing cheerful terms, either you didn't know, or you have not a drop of the compassion of Christ within you. Those men in that mob might as well have shot that child it would have been kinder!

U Said: And no mention of the printing press that he had destroyed..

Must it be mentioned in every story about Joseph smith? And please note the City council deliberated three days before giving their order, they believed that order to be lawful.

U Said: And no mention of the peep stones ..

Nor whether he was wearing boxers or briefs...

U Said: Or the money digging..

Nor wrestling which Joseph was fond of...

U Said: The other guy was in the room with him when he “translated” the “gold plates”

Oliver Cowdery?

U Said: Sans the hat..

He did go hatless sometimes, but some times he wore a hat...

U Said: No mention of the 116 “lost pages”

were they hidden in Carthage?

U Said: Infinitum...

and forever...

U Said: Thank me..

Why?

U Said: My point in this discussion is that we have been instructed by Jesus not to base our faith upon a sign, but upon the truth which we find in the Word of God.

But without his spirit it is impossible to know what is the word of God. "To him that hath ears to hear let him hear" was not just a cute phrase, There are some parts of the Bible that cannot be understood without that spirit. I dare say there are other inspired writings that did not make it into the Bible. Only with the Spirit of God can men discern as they have been commanded to do and ask and receive answers from him.

Historic Christianity has always taught that the Holy Spirit is key in the understanding of the scriptures. Jesus, Himself, makes it clear that this is the case ...
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
A I have said, christians throughout the years have depended upon the ministry of the Holy Spirit in their lives to illustrate and understand the scriptures for them.

All I am asking people to do is ask, it's Biblical ...

But you speak as though christians have not been asking God for His wisdom and understanding down through the ages. Christians were praying for God's wisdom long before Joseph Smith came on the scene ... and they continue to do so.

What you speak of is asking for a particular sign from the Holy Spirit. In this you resemble the Pentecostals, who insist that believers must experience the expression of the Holy Spirit in the particular sign of 'speaking in tongues' ... to validate their spiritual experience.

Jesus told the Jews that they would receive no sign ... additional to what God had already wrought among them.
God has already revealed Himself to us that we may believe that things are as He has said. We either believe what Jesus has already brought to us (in the scriptures) ... or we allow ourselves to be deceived.

We need ... and God will send ... no additional signs.

BINGO!

Actually, SATAN is the one with the 'signs' - FALSE ones.

Revelation 13:11-14
11. Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon.
12. He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed.
13. And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men.
14. Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived.

Any being that can cause FIRE to fall from 'heaven' can SURELY conjure up some silly golden plates!

U Said: My point in this discussion is that we have been instructed by Jesus not to base our faith upon a sign, but upon the truth which we find in the Word of God.

I Said: But without his spirit it is impossible to know what is the word of God. "To him that hath ears to hear let him hear" was not just a cute phrase, There are some parts of the Bible that cannot be understood without that spirit. I dare say there are other inspired writings that did not make it into the Bible. Only with the Spirit of God can men discern as they have been commanded to do and ask and receive answers from him.

U Said later: Historic Christianity has always taught that the Holy Spirit is key in the understanding of the scriptures. Jesus, Himself, makes it clear that this is the case ...

I am not trying to score some cheap theological points here, I really want to understand your answer, so I am cutting this out from the whole rest of the post.

I am also not going to quote scriptures at you here because I want to know what you think, not what you can quote.

It sounds to me like you are saying two contradictory things, and I would appreciate clarification.

To me an answer from God through the holy spirit is not a "Sign" in the sense of "seeking for a sign", Those tend to be spectacular, heal someone, or feed thousands with five loaves, or something big and external to the one seeking the sign. You seem to be saying that asking to know if a book that claims to be of God is indeed his word is seeking for a sign.

At the same time that you are saying that, you say that you have the Holy Spirit to Guide, comfort and open the scriptures to you.

It seems to me that you can't reasonably occupy the position that there are no revelations from God, no testimony of his truths (scriptures), and at same time say the Holy Spirit guides and comforts you every day. Please explain how you can hold both positions.

U Said: But you speak as though christians have not been asking God for His wisdom and understanding down through the ages. Christians were praying for God's wisdom long before Joseph Smith came on the scene ... and they continue to do so.

I am sure that there have been many righteous and good people who have spent much time on their knees in supplication to their lord Jesus Christ, before Joseph Smith, there were also many Before Jesus Christ, the plan of salvation is god's plan and is therefore perfect. God has a plan to allow all to be judged fairly not just those who were born after Jesus, and not just those born after Joseph smith, without going into details here because that would be off topic the LDS church has specific teachings about that that I would be happy to cover whenever anyone wants to know what we believe (but I'm not going to spam you with it.)

As to Joseph Smith, The lord Chooses people for reasons that are beyond our understanding, I doubt if the people of Jesus' time thought a bunch of fishermen, a tax collector and a religious zealot bent on persecuting his church were particularly good choices for spokesmen for that church. I could go on, but I would rather state that while we revere Joseph Smith as the one chosen by God to be his prophet, we do not think he was perfect, nor do we think he was better than other men or theologians of his day, he was chosen by God and that's it we don't get a vote.

U Said: What you speak of is asking for a particular sign from the Holy Spirit. In this you resemble the Pentecostals, who insist that believers must experience the expression of the Holy Spirit in the particular sign of 'speaking in tongues' ... to validate their spiritual experience.

I have never said there was a specific sign that was valid and all other signs are invalid, in fact, if you read my recent posts, I have specifically stated that God's answers are perfect and different for everyone for every one is different.

I agree with you that the "speaking in Tongues" as the only "test" of spirituality is strange. I have had the Gift of Tongues, I learned to speak Chinese by the Gift of Tongues, one of the hardest languages on earth for an English speaker to learn, and in four months I was so fluent that over the phone people thought I was Chinese. I have had the experience of having people ask me a question that I did not know all the words to answer, and I opened my mouth, and said the words I knew and additional words came out of my mouth. When the meeting was over, I went and looked up the words I had spoken and they were perfect, and my vocabulary increased each time.

To this day, I can still speak Chinese effortlessly and it's been twenty years, this is not "normal" This is the gift of tongues at work, and no not every one has to have it to have a testimony, I obtained this gift of God not because of some exceptional worthiness on my part, far from it, but because I accepted a call to teach in Taiwan, and I have no natural ability with languages. When God calls a person to a job he makes that person equal to that job, even if he has to give them a gift they did not have before accepting that calling to do it.

Sorry for the segway, I do not insist on a single type of answer, and I don't know any Mormons who do.

U Said: LOL, SOME posters sure do get their garmies in a twist when they get caught!

It never ceases to amaze me how some antis will go for the lowest form of attack, underwear jokes?

FYI, Garments do not twist.

U Said: I don't believe you have the authority to tell me what I can and can't post and what I can and can't consider authoritative, you can insist that because you were not part of the conversation it didn't happen, you'll just look sillier.

Let's see, you cut out the Part where you say "You are going to have to" and list a bunch of balderdash things I some how have to do.

U Said: Posters are free to POST all the misdirection and obfuscation they please,

Your posts are indeed ample proof, you can stop making your point now, I concede you can and have posted misdirection, obfuscation and I'll even allow Untruth...

U Said: however the fact remains that there was a quote from a LeGrand Richards book that was posted as fact, when indeed the quote was a SUPPOSED "verbal" quote from a theologian to Orson Whitney and THEREFORE CANNOT BE VERIFIED.

God spoke to Moses, there was no third party. God spoke to Saul there was no third party. John was the only one who say his visions, Much of the bible is first person account. Since when did a first person account become indamissable as evidence in public debate and when did you get to make the rules?

Lady Lawyer, can you inform my argumentative friend about the status of a first person account in law? If I am talking to Greyfoxx39, and he incriminates himself to me, can I or Can I not testify about that conversation in Court? As long as I was part of the conversation, my understanding is that it's admissable, if how ever, I heard it from a friend, it's not.

We know the exact book and the location of a copy of that book and you say that's not enough to prove it actually happened?

U Said: I think this is the point where the term HOGWASH is appropriate!

For once I agree with you, the word Hogwash is appropriate in your posts.

Now, just so lurkers don't have to jump around, the quote is:
As Dr. John A. Reiner, a Catholic Theologian said:

“You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don’t even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Catholic Church. The issue is between Catholicism and Mormonism. If we are right, you are wrong; if you are right, we are wrong; and that’s all there is to it. The Protestants haven’t a leg to stand on. If we are wrong, they are wrong with us, for they were a part of us and went out from us; while if we are right, they are apostates whom we cut off long ago. If we really have, as we claim, the apostolic succession from St. Peter, there was no need for Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, then such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary, and Mormonism’s attitude is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the Gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the Gospel in latter days.”

The citation can be traced, Here

What amazes me is that Greyfoxx39 is getting all bent out of shape over something a long dead theologian said, so what, it's not the pope, it's not a definitive statement of anything other than his belief, but some how this statement impacts Grefoxx39's opinions or beliefs in such a way that he cannot seem to leave it alone.

Interesting

ROTFL...this is getting funnier and funnier....keep trying to convince yourself that an unverified supposed conversation is factual.....Lawyers...courts of law......LOLOLOL! Take that unverified conversation attributed by a mormon to a Catholic theologian to a judge and see how far you get!

Call the cops! Get a warrant!.......HAHAHA!

As I quoted before:

As Dr. John A. Reiner, a Catholic Theologian said:

“You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don’t even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Catholic Church. The issue is between Catholicism and Mormonism. If we are right, you are wrong; if you are right, we are wrong; and that’s all there is to it. The Protestants haven’t a leg to stand on. If we are wrong, they are wrong with us, for they were a part of us and went out from us; while if we are right, they are apostates whom we cut off long ago. If we really have, as we claim, the apostolic succession from St. Peter, there was no need for Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, then such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary, and Mormonism’s attitude is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the Gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the Gospel in latter days.”

Source : A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, p. 3

I also like Orson F. Whitney's comment back to him:

I replied: "Doctor, I agree with you in almost everything that you have said; but don't deceive yourself with the notion that we 'Mormons' do not know the strength of our own position. We know it better than you do; we know it better than any other people can know it. We have not all been to college; we cannot all speak the dead languages, and we may be ignoramuses as you say, but we know we are right, and we know that you are wrong." I was just as frank with him as he had been with me.

The Name of the Theologian quoted can be found in http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2008/01/a-footnote-to-the-strength-of-the-mormon-position/

In an autobiography by Orson F. Whitney, called "Through Memory’s Halls: The Life Story of Orson F. Whitney". So you maintain that it's a fraudulent citation in a marvelous work and a wonder because Orson F Whitney does not have third party corroboration to a private conversation with a friend? How many of your conversations do you have a witness to? Does that mean they didn't happen?

Yes, this is funny, I can't wait till the next time you try to use some one persons testimony against Joseph Smith. This standard you are espousing will come back to bite you.

Now as to further citations: TexAgs.com has a citation, The entire story was on page 222-223. The brilliant Catholic Scholar's name is: (drum roll) Dr. John A. Reiner.

I have requested a copy of the pages in question...

Anti's seem to keep trying to understand without God the things Of God. I don't mean you are not acquainted with God, you just don't seem to ask him the important questions as if to say you'll figure it our your self. Paul struck the keynote when he said: Paul hit the nail on the head (as usual) in ! Corr 2:9-11

9. Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit; for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

you insist that someone else had to hear a conversation in order for it to be admissible, I dispute that, or most of our scriptures go the way of the trash bin. Unless you assertion is that any Mormon must have a non Mormon witness to what was said. (which again goes to the "who made you an moderator?" question again.

Let's actually explore the Theory postulated here, it's one of authority, if the Catholic church had a falling away, a mere reformation would not be able to restore lost authority, and since authority is passed by the laying on of hands in the Bible, there would have to have been an angel, or someone to receive the authority from Come and visit someone to reestablish the church of God.

If on the other hand, the Catholic church never apostatized, then there is no need for Joseph smith, nor any of the protestant churches.

The protestants simply and authoritatively have no leg to stand on, that's why many have gone to the All Christians have the priesthood (a totally un biblical position).

I still wonder why John Reiner bothers you so much...

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.