Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How to tell the cult group from the Church? Know the truth!
Christian Messenger (India's Evangelical Newspaper) ^ | Sept. 12, 2009 | Sheba Devaraj

Posted on 09/15/2009 8:21:31 AM PDT by Colofornian

“HI, we’d like to talk to you about Jesus Christ!”

Standing tall, two young and well-dressed American boys at my door broke the ice instantaneously. Happy to see them, I said that we were Christians too. What happened next, however, took me by surprise and left me scrambling for words. Stating that they were members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, they said they wanted to talk about a prophet and a book given to the prophet by God. Though a little shaken, I refused to hear their ideologies — they left only to return another day in a bid to coax me.

In today’s world, cults are very much a reality. Cults are widely prevalent in our country, in our city too. An unexpected encounter with cult members can leave us disturbed. As Jesus warned, during the last days, there will be many people proclaiming different ideologies in His name. It is our duty to be vigilant and strong in faith.

God’s Word says that many deceptive spirits will be on the loose, waiting to swallow the unaware. So do we know how to discern deceptions? We may know that their claims do not align with God’s Word, we may even understand that their belief is not the Truth – but how do we handle encounters with cult members? How do we prepare ourselves to face the challenges of the last days? One way is to be aware of the different cults and to understand their approach.

Take the case of Mormons. Mormonism and polygamy go hand in hand - an attractive proposition for today’s world. ‘Mormonism’ has a good number of followers in the US and several other parts of the world. But the Mormons have been in Chennai as well for nearly a decade now and have slowly yet steadily increased in numerical strength.

A conversation based on such beliefs can perturb anybody, especially if we are not prepared. THE CHRISTIAN MESSENGER spoke to a cross-section of senior church leaders, who threw light on how we could tackle such encounters. Each of them shared valuable insights on how to be prepared always, how to answer cult members, and how to watch and pray.

Pastor P Vijayaraghavan of the Apostolic Church said, “I know that the Mormons have been around in Chennai for about 10 years. They’ve grown a lot and that wouldn’t be possible but for their polygamous behavior.” He agreed that as believers, we should know Christian truth well enough to be able to decipher cults.

“Cult groups have something novel to offer to people and especially exploit their gullible nature,” said he said.

Pastor Arthur Devadoss of Hosanna Ministries had an interesting anecdote to share.

“The Mormons gave me their book sometime ago and I didn’t even bother to read it. They came back for the book and fought with me,” he said.

However, Pastor Devadoss is worried about another new church group.

“There is a new group called the Indian Church of Christ that approaches people with visiting cards; they worry me the most. They speak the local language and lure youngsters to join them. They, too, propagate polygamy and immoral relationships,” he said.

He has briefed his congregation well about such cults and has asked them to stand up for their beliefs. In case they are unable to do so, he asks them to just invite the cult followers to their church or refer them to the pastor. “They’ll never trouble you again,” Devadoss affirmed.

Pastor Jayakaran Emmanuel of Power House Church echoes this view.

“It’s better for you not to entertain them. Since we know their beliefs are misleading and untrue, don’t encourage them and they won’t approach you further,” he said. Is there anything else that a believer needs to be aware of to tackle these cultists?

Rev. D.C. Premraj, Presbyter of St. George’s Cathedral, said: “There are just a few things that we should watch out for. First, we should be strong in our beliefs. We must make an effort to understand what we believe in. Second, as our faith and belief grow, we must be grounded Biblically. Our foundation must be clear and strong in God’s Word. Third, during any such encounters, check for Biblical context. Anyone can quote from the Bible, but we must know how relevant and contextual it is.”

Confirmation classes and Bible studies conducted by churches are aimed at making the believers’ steadfast in their faith, Rev. Premraj added.

Pastor Jagadeesan Kalyanakumar of Harvest Christian Assembly quoted Ephesians 4:16: “Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.” He added: “The rule of thumb is that if you know the original, you can identify the counterfeit. And the more familiar you are with God’s Word, the better you can discern and safeguard yourself from deceptive doctrines.”

In all this, the Bible is the final authority to check any doctrine. Sola Scriptura, meaning the Bible alone, is the key theme in the church’s reformation of the 16th century.

The Jehovah Witnesses, for instance, proclaim Jesus to be an angel with extraordinary powers. But the Bible very clearly says that He is the Messiah, the only begotten Son of God who revealed God and his love to humanity (John: 3:16). Another example, the Mormons’ scripture includes the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.

As Christians, Pastor Joshua Jeyaseelan, Tamil Baptist Church, said: “We have one revealed Word of God which is the Holy Scripture (II Timothy 3:16). So any new doctrine or cult has to be analyzed and understood in the light of the Scripture.”

Pastor Vijayaraghavan said, “We must know how to identify a cult and that’s by knowing what they are. Cults are major deviations from orthodox Christianity relative to the Bible’s cardinal doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, the second coming, millennial reign, and salvation by the grace of Jesus Christ.”

It is our responsibility to understand our beliefs, our stand. Just like the wise man that built his house on the Rock, if our foundation is strong and built on Jesus, it will not be shaken.

Today, it was I who met with the Mormons, tomorrow it could be you. Let us watch and pray for the salvation of cult members and for God to grant us the wisdom to stand strong in His Word.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Evangelical Christian; Other Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: antimormonthread; cults; lds; mormon; threadjihad
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last
Well, obviously Indian Christians have heard about both historical Mormon polygamy and the Mormon cousins' contemporary polygamy and obviously attribute it across the board. But, hey, since Lds apostolic teaching is that polygamy will be re-instituted on earth, I don't think folks can get too bothered about being a few years off in either direction:

"Obviously the holy practice (of polygamy) will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium." (LDS apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition, see pp. 577-579 for context)

1 posted on 09/15/2009 8:21:31 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mbs6; SkyPilot; Elsie
From the article: God’s Word says that many deceptive spirits will be on the loose, waiting to swallow the unaware. So do we know how to discern deceptions? We may know that their claims do not align with God’s Word, we may even understand that their belief is not the Truth – but how do we handle encounters with cult members? How do we prepare ourselves to face the challenges of the last days? One way is to be aware of the different cults and to understand their approach.

If anyone wants to know why I post what I post, this is a decent summary from the point of view of an Indian Evangelical.

Besides, over the years a dozen or so Lds missionaries --out the literal million-plus they've sent out -- have visited me. I'm hospitable. I invite them in. We dialogue. They move on. Hopefully, they haven't felt "threatened." With a few, we've met repeatedly. Been on good terms.

Hey, I'm hospitable to them. I simply hope they return the "e-living room" treatment when I visit those who fund the resources Lds missionaries take with them.

2 posted on 09/15/2009 8:26:32 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I find that my “No Trespassing” signs work pretty well for keeping the Mormans and Jehova’s Witness folks away from my door.


3 posted on 09/15/2009 8:27:44 AM PDT by scooter2 (IMPEACH OBAMA NOW !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I don’t know what the point is of posting this on a political web site. If the purpose is to create division, I think most of us have learned to brush that off, praise God.

The article has an intemperate tone.


4 posted on 09/15/2009 8:30:23 AM PDT by campaignPete R-CT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

It’s posted in the religion forum. This isn’t a solely political website.


5 posted on 09/15/2009 8:37:15 AM PDT by SandyInSeattle (Socialism is the plundering of the productive by the unaccountable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT
This thread is posted in the Religion Forum.

If you do not wish to see RF posts, do NOT use the "everything" option on the browse. Instead, browse by "News/Activism." When you log back in, the browse will reset to "everything" - so be sure to set it back to "News/Activism."

6 posted on 09/15/2009 8:37:39 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

“I don’t know what the point is of posting this on a political web site. If the purpose is to create division, I think most of us have learned to brush that off, praise God.

You are on the Religion Forum of FR. If you don’t want to see any religious articles, you can adjust your settings.


7 posted on 09/15/2009 8:38:32 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
We were visited by Jehovah's Witnesses, Nice Young Confused Men. The things we knew from study that they DIDN'T mention in their lead in to their synthetic religion:

Jesus was the Archangel Michael before he was born in the flesh.

Satan is Jesus' brother.

There is no Trinity (because their founder couldn't understand it.)

The "Holy Spirit" doesn't exist as a moving force or part of God.

Jesus has not always existed...he was a created being, not "with God at the Beginning."

Since the Bible says you should "only worship God", those multiple parts of the Bible where people worshiped Jesus (Disciples in the boat, Wise men from the East, etc.) are re-translated as "payed obeisance to Jesus".

And since EVERYBODY knows the Wise Men were really Astrologers, their worship doesn't count, of course.

There's more of course, but those are the highlights. We had to ask them about this, as the prepackaged spiel about "here comes the Kingdom of God don't you want to be part of it) left this stuff out. It is worth noting that although the Bible says if a prophet is wrong about any tiny thing, his word is not of God, the JW's have proclaimed Christ's immanent return a half dozen times in their history and been wrong. (Current church dogma is that Christ "returned secretly" to Earth in 1914. You remember that, right? When His toe touched the mountain and shattered it so the whole world heard? Remember?)

8 posted on 09/15/2009 8:40:41 AM PDT by 50sDad (The Left cannot understand life is not in a test tube. Raise taxes, & jobs go away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

As an anti-mormon you continue to be obsessed with all things LDS. I am continually surprised that this website which is conservative and freedom loving continues to promote thru loose moderation attacks on any religion. All conservatives should seek to unite against the dark oppression that exists and seek a more Christ-like dialogue between each other. I’m sure my comment will spark mass postings (usually canned and rebroadcasted) from the normal dozen or so anti-mormon folks. You know who you are.


9 posted on 09/15/2009 8:41:47 AM PDT by Huddled Masses ("There you go again...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad

Tried to keep that neutral...kill it if anyone gets in a snit.


10 posted on 09/15/2009 8:42:20 AM PDT by 50sDad (The Left cannot understand life is not in a test tube. Raise taxes, & jobs go away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad

Tried to keep that neutral...kill it if anyone gets in a snit.


11 posted on 09/15/2009 8:42:26 AM PDT by 50sDad (The Left cannot understand life is not in a test tube. Raise taxes, & jobs go away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Indian Christians"

I heard they're going to start proselytizing from some call center in New Delhi in a cooperative venture with Dell Computers:

"Hello? Thank you for calling Dell Technical Support, the answer to your computer problem is to reinstall Windows, the answer to the question of your eternal fate is to join up with the Indian Church of Christ! If you require further assistance, press '1' for Hindi, '2' for English! We apologize for the delay as all customer service-evangelists are busy at the moment..."
12 posted on 09/15/2009 8:42:40 AM PDT by mkjessup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

I am Catholic, which is why I am aware that writing articles that use innuendo and exaggeration is sinful. It violates the 8th commandment.

Sounds like it belongs right here in the Religion forum. BAD RELIGION.


13 posted on 09/15/2009 8:43:01 AM PDT by campaignPete R-CT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT
I don’t know what the point is of posting this on a political web site. If the purpose is to create division, I think most of us have learned to brush that off, praise God. The article has an intemperate tone.

#1, Re: political web site -- you can set your settings so that "religion" section headlines don't pop up on your screen. (That way, you can toolie & 'temperate' away & not be 'bothered' w/any religious overtones at all)

#2, nobody forced you to read the article -- or comment. 'Tis a Free Republic world & you could zoom on by just like we all do whether it's a chicken-dressed up teen standing roadside gyrating, or billboards, or TV commercials.

If the purpose is to create division...

#3, Perhaps you just don't understand that the supposed first words expressed to the founder of Mormonism by his unnamed entities who appeared to him was to...
...label ALL other churches as unjoinable (he later called all Christians "apostates")
...label ALL Christian sect professing believers as "corrupt"
...and label ALL Christian sect creeds (Catholic, Protestant AND Orthodox) as an "abomination" to the Mormon god.

IOW, we don't even need to "create divisions" because Joseph Smith, Jr. opened up the widest divisive frontline you could ever imagine -- all right from the get-go!

If you don't believe, feel free to peruse any Mormon Pearl of Great Price "scripture." (Just go to Joseph Smith - History, verses 18-20...it's all there in black & white)

14 posted on 09/15/2009 8:43:24 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

Sorry, my comment was intended for Colofornian.


15 posted on 09/15/2009 8:43:38 AM PDT by Huddled Masses ("There you go again...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: scooter2
Witness folks away from my door

The Mormons kept coming to my door until I started asking about their having to call their women to heaven and them being "Eternally Pregnant". When I asked about their Elders belief in the "Mother Ship" and the Planet Kobol - they said I really did know something about Mormonism. When they asked if I had read the Book of the Mormon, I said I had (I read it twice) and said that the Bible is far superior to me.

The "Witnesses" stopped coming after I asked why didn't Christ come bodily and Establish a visible world government in 1914? and how were folks bodies preserved since then? (Rather than being Frozen as they want to now).

16 posted on 09/15/2009 8:44:31 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT

How ya feelin’ Pete? Head spinning yet from getting smacked around? LOL


17 posted on 09/15/2009 8:44:38 AM PDT by mkjessup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses
Your tag line really sums up your point of view "there you go again".

Would you like cheese with your whine.

18 posted on 09/15/2009 8:45:22 AM PDT by svcw (Legalism reinforces self-righteousness - it communicates to you the good news of your own goodness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses; campaignPete R-CT
...continues to promote thru loose moderation attacks on any religion.

Well, you didn't address this to me, but let me ask you: By your open critique of somebody's religious expression on this thread, are you yourself then thereby engaging in an "attack" upon a religion?

And if you are, then why are you violating your own personal standard?

If you don't think you're attacking somebody's religious expression, it sure sounds like a disagreement -- a critique -- and so please explain the "degree" of difference you see between a so-called "attack" and critique? (One man's critique is another man's "attack", eh?)

19 posted on 09/15/2009 8:49:29 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator

To: Colofornian
LOL! An article by an anti posted by an anti, POPCORN!

21 posted on 09/15/2009 8:56:23 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Concho; campaignPete R-CT; Huddled Masses
Do not use potty language - or references to potty language - on the Religion Forum.

Also, this is an "open" thread on the Religion Forum which means it is a town square format for debate. Posters may argue pro or con - they may ridicule other beliefs, religious authorities and deities.

Thick skin is required on "open" threads in the RF.

Thin skinned posters should ignore them altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled "ecumenical" "caucus" "devotional" or "prayer."

And if the poster is offended by religious discussion, he should ignore the Religion Forum altogether.

To do this, do NOT use the "everything" option on the browse. Instead, browse by "News/Activism." When you log back in, the browse will reset to "everything" - so be sure to set it back to "News/Activism."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Click on my profile page for other guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum.

22 posted on 09/15/2009 8:58:03 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator; Concho; campaignPete R-CT; Huddled Masses
And a couple other pointers:

1.) When encountering 'Prayer Threads for 0bama', don't offend the OP by saying you're praying for 0bama to be hit by a bus (I would ping the usual suspect who posts those threads, but they have requested that I not ping them anymore unless Jesus comes back first, or something like that ;)

2.) Don't make jokes about Joel O'Steen's hair, we know he looks like Martin Short's long lost brother, but don't mention that.

(Just a little levity to lighten things up some, lol :)
23 posted on 09/15/2009 9:04:30 AM PDT by mkjessup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses
All conservatives should seek to unite against the dark oppression that exists and seek a more Christ-like dialogue between each other.

Well, you obviously haven't examined all of your worldview assumptions fully.

#1 -- you seem to assume there's only one (primary?) type of "dark oppression" -- perhaps socio-political -- and you seem to dismiss there might be such a thing as religious oppression. (Since Jesus referenced some Pharisaical Jews in John 8 as being sons of the devil, Jesus' comment alone reveals your shortsightedness)

#2 re: a more Christ-like dialogue between each other" -- are you aware that Christ referenced Pharisaical Jews as "brood of vipers" -- as "whitewashed sepulcres" (graveyards) -- as people who would proselyte in order to make their converts "twice the son of hell?" (Does that disturb your "wholesome" image of the Son of God as being only some meely-mouthed pushover?) Jesus was most "intolerant" with the religious legalists of his day -- and therefore, being "Christ like" will at times mean putting our foot down with contemporary religious legalists.

#3 -- you also assume that there aren't occasions where we don't seek even your version of what a "more Christ-like dialogue" would look like. I engage in that frequently -- because I think we also need to approach individual people whereever they are at -- and Christ had some of those kind of discussions as well.

So, these "civil" discussions have taken place in a lot of distinct settings. That includes numerous civil discussions with Lds here. It's included numerous civil discussions with Lds missionaries and Lds relatives.

I guess what I don't get is that you think you somehow know or have reviewed all or most...
...inter-religious transaction among certain FReepers,
...inter-religious relationship among certain FReepers,
...inter-religious FR thread,
...inter-religious online discussions beyond FR...
...and can therefore assume conclusions well beyond any mortal assessment.

24 posted on 09/15/2009 9:17:03 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.


25 posted on 09/15/2009 9:21:33 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian; pissant
I'd like to think that we can all agree that:

Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one cometh unto the Father except by Me" and it is clearly stated in Scripture that the Name of Jesus Christ "Is above every other name" and that He is King of kings, Lord of lords and it is by His precious Blood shed for the redemption of our sins, that we are saved and reconciled to Almighty God.

I'll be the first to admit and confess that I am a wretched sinner, but I am a sinner saved by the Grace of God, and I have placed my soul in the Hands of Jesus Christ and He will not forsake me nor abandon me, and if I, a mere pissant (w/apologies to our own pissant) can find the common sense and logic to understand that and embrace it, then it ought to be clear to any living soul, as I see it.
26 posted on 09/15/2009 9:27:52 AM PDT by mkjessup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses
All conservatives should seek to unite against the dark oppression that exists...

Well, aside from my third point in post #14 -- which shows that Lds have refused to unite with us since the 1830s [not very "inspiring" to coalesce on some of the deeper things when they think you're "apostates," creedally abominable -- 100% so, etc.]...yet I still think we can work with Lds on a number of things together...Prop 8, Boy Scouts, food pantries, protecting the pre-born, and the like.

Beyond that, your comment also assumes one other thing I didn't address in my last post among all your other assumptions -- that you assume you can set the cultural agenda for all Christians -- because aren't Christians the foremost "base" among conservatives? (Rather arrogant to project that agenda, isn't it?)

Don't we take our cultural cue from a certain "Lord" named Jesus Christ? Who are we to follow when it comes to setting cultural priorities? Jesus and the apostle Paul? or Huddles Masses?

Here's Jesus:

"I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him." (Luke 12:4-5)

So does Jesus say, "fear the 'dark (political) oppression'?" (No)
Does Jesus say "fear the 'enemies of our freedom loving republic' within our borders?" (No)
Instead, does He say to exercise fear of the One who has authority to cast somebody into hell? (Yes)
So, indeed, our "fear" is on behalf of those who are placing their eternal spiritual lives at risk.

As for "uniting" I could probably guess that the folks who the apostle Paul warned the church @ Ephesus about had the bulk in common with the sheep there. Both groups were "religious." So, did Paul play the "allies"-game-don't-divide-us-you're playing? (No)

As Paul was leaving the church of Ephesus, he warned them with this high-priority alert:

"I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears." (Acts 20:29-31)

Paul's cultural priority? (Defend against the false disciples who will proselytize the flock and draw away men unto themselves!)

Tell me something, Huddled Masses: If you did something tearfully night and day for three years, do you think it's rather important? So what? We're just to conclude, "Oh, the man who contributed a good chunk to the New Testament -- what does he know about cultural priorities?"

I'll take Paul's and Jesus' already-revealed priorities to your guesswork based upon bashing those willing to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3)

27 posted on 09/15/2009 9:30:25 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad
We were visited by Jehovah's Witnesses, Nice Young Confused Men. The things we knew from study that they DIDN'T mention in their lead in to their synthetic religion: Jesus was the Archangel Michael before he was born in the flesh. Satan is Jesus' brother.

Yes, to the JW, Jesus was an archangel-turned-man-turned semi-god. But Satan's brother? (I'm not sure I've heard that). Aren't you confusing that with the Mormon belief that Satan is Jesus' immediate younger brother? That, once uopn a time, the only difference between them was "spiritual birth order" in some pre-existence?

28 posted on 09/15/2009 9:37:01 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Well, that'd be nice if we could all agree with what you said. But, #1, John 14:6 reveals Jesus to be an exclusive intermediary to the Father...and plenty of other religious folk would like to entertain their own "way" to the Father.

#2, 'tis religious folk with whom we disagree sharply who might even on the surface agree with what you wrote. But as soon as you start defining a few of those terms, you realize they have badly redefined them and we're no longer even talking about the same thing.

29 posted on 09/15/2009 9:40:23 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I believe I am mixing my demi-faiths. Thanks!


30 posted on 09/15/2009 9:49:49 AM PDT by 50sDad (The Left cannot understand life is not in a test tube. Raise taxes, & jobs go away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses; colorcountry; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; svcw; Zakeet; SkyPilot; ...
from the normal dozen or so anti-mormon folks

Oh, there are quite a few more than a dozen or so on the Inman ping list...and a whole bunch more FReepers that post on these threads that AREN'T on the ping list....if you're gonna preach, get your facts straight...k?

Pinging the mighty Inmans.

31 posted on 09/15/2009 9:51:29 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Obama, the cow patty version of Midas. Everything he says is bull, everything he touches is crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator

There is nothing quite so intolerant as the religious right. Obviously this segment of society lives off in some dream world because in most of America, people work together. If you came into this small community and showed this sort of hypocracy, you would be shunned, as you would in most communities. Who do you think the community is? It is all the people, regardless of what church they attend. If you go stomping on their rights to worship as they see fit, and your house catches on fire, who do you think is going to be on the volunteer fire department? You should ask yourself,,,will they make a 3 minute response, or will it take the trucks 13 minutes to get to your fire? Same with the ambulance, same with the merchants.

If you have not lived or worked amongst these people you should not be judging them. They bother no one, and they will sure be amongst the first to help out others, unlike most of the main stream religions.


32 posted on 09/15/2009 10:00:36 AM PDT by Concho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses; DelphiUser; greyfoxx39; All
from the normal dozen or so anti-mormon folks [HM]

anti [DU]

I think a clarification is in order -- and I don't know if I speak on behalf of all of the "Flying Inmans" -- but it certainly applies to me.

Just because Jesus at times "put his foot down" and practiced tough love with the Pharisees, doesn't mean he was "against" (anti) the individual Pharisee as a person. Jesus could both simultaneously love the Pharisee while taking issue with their religious and social beliefs and traditions.

An atheist or Muslim could be against me as a Christian based upon my beliefs, but I wouldn't assume he is automatically "against" or "anti" every Christian person. (Many may have Christians, for example, within their own extended families).

Likewise, I have Mormons within my own extended family...and just because some FReepers lack "appreciation" for the Mormon belief system, doesn't equate to being against the individual Mormon person.

Obviously God loves every Mormon. Mormons are our neighbors. We are called to love them. God holds every Mormon to be of tremendous value and worth, and I recognize that value & worth.

The apostle Paul could be for the Jewish circumcizer -- going into Jewish synagogues repeatedly in the era of Acts to attempt to win them over with debate and dialogue, often rigorous exchanges taking place -- and still speak forcefully against circumcision being demanded of new Christian converts by those same exact circumcizers.

I think labels like "anti" allow others to just be dismissive of us without having to either deal with the issues we raise or treat us as neighbors with whom we can interact both 1-on-1 and as groups.

33 posted on 09/15/2009 10:14:11 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses; greyfoxx39; Religion Moderator
As an anti-mormon you continue to be obsessed with all which is conservative and freedom loving continues to promote thru loose moderation attacks on any religion. All conservatives should seek to unite against the dark oppression that exists and seek a more Christ-like dialogue between each other. I’m sure my comment will spark mass postings (usually canned and rebroadcasted) from the normal dozen or so anti-mormon folks. You know who you are.

well, what youll find here is a large group of spiritually minded folk, from theologians, pastors (I am former), and lay beleivers.....all of whom investigate their Scriptures, noting quite passionately when doctrine diverges from a Scriptural basis. We see this quite often in mormon doctrine....hence the passionate discourse instead of soft platitudes and kumbayahs. The moderation here is actually quite fair and draws complaints from both sides, meaning its balanced

34 posted on 09/15/2009 10:16:32 AM PDT by Revelation 911 (How many 100's of 1000's of our servicemen died so we would never bow to a king?" -freeper pnh102)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Concho; Religion Moderator

Many of us who post on this particular subject, once belonged, or still belong to these communities as members of this sect.

I was born a sixth generation Mormon into a family who has resided and still resides in an almost 100% LDS town in the heart of Southern Utah since 1864, isolated from the nearest city of any size by at least 200 miles.

I know what I am posting about. Why do you think you somehow have more experience to speak of?


35 posted on 09/15/2009 10:24:20 AM PDT by colorcountry (A faith without truth is not true faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Concho
There is nothing quite so intolerant as the religious right.

(Except, perhaps, those intolerant of the religious right?)

Obviously this segment of society lives off in some dream world because in most of America, people work together.

So, are you willing to work together with the religious right?

If you go stomping on their rights to worship as they see fit, and your house catches on fire, who do you think is going to be on the volunteer fire department?

I've said on repeated threads that Christian and Mormons work together @ Boy Scout meetings all the time. Christians and Mormons worked together in defeating Prop 8. (Is that a revelation to you that we don't recognize the obvious?)

As for "stomping on their rights to worship as they see fit," what? Does "the religious right" block the doors to Mormon meetinghouses or something? Are Lds stakes and wardhouses' parking lots blockaded by "the religious right" (No? Whew!!! I thought you were reporting on some "breaking news" or something)

If you meant by that "no religious disagreements in the public square are 'allowed' by you -- less it come across as 'stomping on their rights to worship as they see fit'" -- then isn't that a form of clamped-down censorship on your part?
And shouldn't your expression then go two ways?
Shouldn't you have objected long ago to Lds printing "scriptures" that call 100% of all Christian sect beliefs "an abomination" to the Mormon god?
Shouldn't you have objected long ago to Lds printing "scriptures" that call 100% of all Christian sect professing believers "corrupt?"
If you're so anti-intolerance, where have you been all this time in objecting to these Mormon labels upon the rest of us? [These were written out in the early 1830s; and treated as "Scripture" by all Mormons since the 1870s]

If you have not lived or worked amongst these people you should not be judging them. They bother no one, and they will sure be amongst the first to help out others, unlike most of the main stream religions.

First of all, let's apply your standard to yourself. You don't live among the "religious right" do you? (at least you don't live among the FReepers you are commenting about, right?) Yet in this post, you label us as...
...intolerant...
...hypocrites...
...stompers of religious rights...
...and judges...

You who are telling others not to "judge" people you don't know -- you seem to do a pretty good job of judging people you don't know. So which are we to believe? The standard you say you believe that you want to impose upon others? Or the actions that belie your standard & actually convey "it's OK to judge others" -- as long as you put yourself on a higher pedestal in the process?

As far as "judging" goes, can truth and falsity, right and wrong, be "judged?" If I advised a grandson, "don't cohabit with a girl" -- am I judging? Or speaking the truth with tough love?

36 posted on 09/15/2009 10:32:36 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Concho
If you have not lived or worked amongst these people you should not be judging them.

I HAVE lived and worked amongst mormons, and left the religion years ago....for which I WAS shunned.

..they will sure be amongst the first to help out others, unlike most of the main stream religions.

That is pure mormon propaganda. Just because Christians don't have a special yellow T shirt to wear to, and advertise their response to disasters so that everyone will recognize their efforts, they are out there every time the mormons are.

Mormon Helping Hands

No one is "stomping on their rights to worship as they see fit" here. The right to discuss is as open to mormon-defenders as is the right to discuss mormon fallacies. That's what freedom of speech is all about.

There is nothing quite so intolerant as the religious right. Obviously this segment of society lives off in some dream world....

I believe this will be seen as a pretty unpopular viewpoint on FR.

Defending mormonism on the grounds of "tolerance" is a futile occupation.

37 posted on 09/15/2009 10:39:07 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Obama, the cow patty version of Midas. Everything he says is bull, everything he touches is crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
They’ve grown a lot and that wouldn’t be possible but for their polygamous behavior.

I'm a Baptist, and am more than satisfied with one wife (actually the second as my first has preceeded me to heaven).

That said, I recall an awful lot of people in the Old Testament having multiple wives. I believe that it was encouraged by God - "Be fruitful and multiply". I also recall the passage directing a man whose brother dies to take his wife onto himself. All the children of this union would be considered his brother's.

If the rules were changed, I'd like to know chapter and verse - and not some convoluted reasoning that doesn't reference the Bible.

38 posted on 09/15/2009 10:39:20 AM PDT by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Cults are founded upon false prophecies by false "Prophets". Joe Smith is guilty of both.

Mormons have every right to practice their 'religion', but the main problem that any Christian has of mormons is that mormons claim to be Christian, when they are the furthest thing from the truth of Christianity. Mormons are not Christians. It all begins with basic Christine Doctrine; you know, the Doctrine that mormons don't follow.

39 posted on 09/15/2009 10:58:52 AM PDT by NoRedTape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Retired COB
That said, I recall an awful lot of people in the Old Testament having multiple wives. I believe that it was encouraged by God - "Be fruitful and multiply".

Well, thank you for your comment.

#1 It's a myth to think that polygamy automatically results in additional children. Brigham Young, for example, lived a long life -- had 27 wives & 57 children -- but had no children with 17 of those wives -- and only 2 or 3 of them because of age reasons. That means that 14 of those wives lost out on 3 or more kids -- and several wives didn't likewise reach the demographic average of the 19th century. Therefore, 50 less kids were probably born because of Brigham's hoarding of women.

#2 The "be fruitful and multiply" comes from Gen. 1:28 -- and we also need to look at Gen. 2:24 to review God's intention from the very beginning re: the institution of marriage: For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

Now I didn't see plural people mentioned either in Gen. 2 (or Matthew 19 where Jesus talks about this same subject). Do you? And if marriage is becoming "one flesh" -- are you telling us that 2 wives and one man all become "one single flesh" in God's eyes? (Two "sister wives" become part of the same flesh?) Really?

If the rules were changed, I'd like to know chapter and verse - and not some convoluted reasoning that doesn't reference the Bible.

Good request. Even before Solomon took many wives, these verses existed:

He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. (Deut 17:17)
Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living. (Lev. 18:18) [BTW, going against this injunction frequently happend with 19th century & early 20th century Mormons -- men often married the sisters of their wives]

So, despite the injunction of Dt. 17:17 & Lev. 18:18, we see what happened with Solomon:

He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. (1 Kings 11:3)

We see EXACTLY what God warned about in Dt. 17:17 happened to Solomon!

Besides, if we're going to start using OT figures as "marriage models" I doubt you'd be OK with 700 wives & 300 concubines

And I think, you'd also NOT be OK with how Jacob came to pick up a second wife, right? Otherwise, when your daughter gets married, just slip in a substitute sister first -- so that the groom doesn't know it til he's into his honeymoon. Then if he stills want your other daughter, make him work for you for years on end if he wants the other one. IOW, deception was the basis for Jacob's polygamy -- and that's not grounds for a Christian marriage, is it?

As for Abram, it wasn't his idea and it wasn't God's idea to "encourage" Abram sleeping with a servant girl that everybody (except his wife) still referenced as nothing other than a servant girl after he slept with her -- including an angel. In fact, what became of this arrangement? (The person who became the clan leader of the entire people group which embraced Islam)

40 posted on 09/15/2009 11:02:02 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Like I said, I'm more than happy with just one.

I still didn't see the reference where it says no more than one. As a matter of fact if you take your deceased brother's wife in accordance with the Scripture and are already married, you have been directed to have more than one wife.

41 posted on 09/15/2009 11:09:42 AM PDT by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

A Mitt Supporter. Facts are a waste.


42 posted on 09/15/2009 11:12:16 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (There's something socialist in the neighborhood, who ya gonna call? MITTBUSTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

Figures. A little envy at the numbers goin’ on there? Myth supporters on FR are fewer and fewer.


43 posted on 09/15/2009 11:15:42 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Obama, the cow patty version of Midas. Everything he says is bull, everything he touches is crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

The ones that are left are holding their own though. Amazing.


44 posted on 09/15/2009 11:18:06 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (There's something socialist in the neighborhood, who ya gonna call? MITTBUSTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22
The ones that are left are holding their own though. Amazing.

The twooo believers. Are they still blasting JR?

45 posted on 09/15/2009 11:19:29 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Obama, the cow patty version of Midas. Everything he says is bull, everything he touches is crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
They avoid it like the plague until it is presented right in front of them.

It really is funny, they will call all those opposing Mitt idiots for not thinking he is a Conservative stalwart, or haters and bigots because the ONLY reason we can oppose the great Conservative is his faith (forget Romney Care, guns, abortions yada yada yada...) as if they are not saying that about the Boss as well...

46 posted on 09/15/2009 11:28:20 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (There's something socialist in the neighborhood, who ya gonna call? MITTBUSTERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Retired COB

I recall an awful lot of people in the Old Testament having multiple wives. I believe that it was encouraged by God - “Be fruitful and multiply”.
__________________________________________________

Got scripture for that amazing comment ???

Well, never you mind little Grasshopper...Nana has...

Who was God speaking to ???

Well let’s read the Bible, shall we ???

Yes, we shall...

Gen 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Genesis 1:26-28

OK so God made male and female...and told them to “be fruitful and multiply”..

But how many of each was he talking to ???

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Gen 2:8 ¶ And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Genesis 2:7, 8

OK that was ONE man...

Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Gennesis 2:20-23

And that was ONE woman..

ONE man and ONE woman that God told to be fruitful and multiply...

ONE man and ONE woman... the set number in a marriage...

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his WIFE: and they shall be one flesh. Genesis 2:24

And He never told anyone to take more than one wife and then “Be fruitful and multiply”....

However He did say “Thou shalt not commit adaultry” Exodus 20:14

OK that was Bible 101...

Now for Biology 101....

To be fruitful and multiply takes one man and one woman...Every time...

If a man has 2 or more wives he will not multiply any faster than if those women all had their own husbands...

One man, ten “wives” = 10 babies (OK 11, one set of twins)

Ten men ten wives (one each) = ten babies (11, one set of twins..

Only a mormon would attempt to say more children will be produced by one old senile man hogging all the young girls while nine young fertile men go without...


47 posted on 09/15/2009 11:29:30 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
Only a mormon would attempt to say more children will be produced by one old senile man hogging all the young girls while nine young fertile men go without...

I'm still not convinced.....most farmers I know only have one bull and bunches of cows.

48 posted on 09/15/2009 11:40:53 AM PDT by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Huddled Masses

[As an anti-mormon you continue to be obsessed with all things LDS. I am continually surprised that this website which is conservative and freedom loving continues to promote thru loose moderation attacks on any religion.]

Except my opposition is as much political as it is also religious, having come from experience here in Nevada. Besides Harry Reid I also follow corrupt Mormons like Lance Malone and Dario Herrera. That certainly doesn’t mean other religions have no corrupt politicians, only that in this petri dish some of the signs point in well defined directions. Romney and Gibbons and Hatch are similar.


49 posted on 09/15/2009 11:57:58 AM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Retired COB
As a matter of fact if you take your deceased brother's wife in accordance with the Scripture and are already married, you have been directed to have more than one wife.

Taking your brother's wife as a wife (caretaking could be another matter) was intended for widowers.

How do we know this? These injunctions from Lev. 18:18 and 20:21:
Do NOT take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living. (Lev. 18:18)
If a man marries his brother's wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. (Lev. 20:21)

Can that be any clearer for you?

I still didn't see the reference where it says no more than one

OK, let's go back to basic Biblical math. Let's say you lived as a young single man in an African culture without a Bible translation in your language -- a culture that had some polygamy in its heritage. And let's say you had a village mentor -- an almost father-like figure -- who had seen a Bible in another language at one time, and read parts of it.

You approach him and ask him for marital advice. And he says to you: "The sacred book said, 'a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.' And the god-man also said, 'Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one."

And you say, "So I become 'one flesh' with the wife I marry, right?" (And the mentor says "Yes, that is my counsel.")

And you then say, "But the book doesn't say non-leaders can't have two wives, does it?"

And the village counselor says, "I told you the book's math. I never said anything about the 3 becoming 1 flesh. I never said anything about the 3 now to be regarded as 1. And I only talked about husband, singular, wife, singular. So why do you ask about a limited plural that the sacred book never talked about? The sacred book knows of no such thing of one wife becoming one flesh with a sister wife. Elsewise, on what grounds would the Americans ever oppose lesbian 'marriages?'"

Citations above: Gen. 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6

Bottom line: There's a certain "slyness" in your question. And what is that slyness? It implies that we only need to legalistically obey that which God tells us NOT to do -- and since God didn't specifically tell us NOT to take a second simultaneous wife (unless you're a church leader), then it "must be OK."

We need to reverse our obedience mindset. Instead of saying to ourselves, "Well, if there's no specific rule in this Bible rulebook, I guess I can do it" -- we need to see God as a Father to be honored -- and if he told us to take a wife (singular) in Gen. 2:24 -- that's our prescription.

And if Jesus His Son repeated that prescription in Matthew 19 just so that we're clear about it, then that's that.

Elsewise, we get into the mindset that if we were to find something obviously immoral that's NOT specifically mentioned in Scripture, then it's OK to do an "end-run" around God's original intentions.

The Bible was never intended to be a "don't list" of everything we're not to do. But it is a prescription for life and living -- both earthly and eternally.

50 posted on 09/15/2009 11:58:17 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-174 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