Posted on 06/01/2011 10:06:48 AM PDT by Colofornian
Go!!!
This is what I hate about these “Religious” threads. No, I don’t know I am in one until I’m chastised.
__________________________________________________
WOW kid
you had me quickly checking the right bottom corner
and Yeppers
THIS IS THE RELIGION FORUM
are you lost ???
Where did you want to go ???
I have a map...
Apparently, if someone posts a “I hate all Mormons thread”, you are supposed to go along with the hatred and NEVER veer from it.
_____________________________________________
In all my years here I never have stumbled across one of those threads
are you sure you werte in FR at the time ???
Which is okay by me. Being here on FR for so long, it seems some mods have their own agenda.
So be it. I love my FR and will continue to support it. It’s not the 1st time my posts have been deleted, lol, as I’m sure most of us can relate to!
I just hate the infighting. It seems we are all in the same boat (except when it comes to religion). I’m sure you’ve partaken in some of those threads!
Catholics vs. Lutherans vs. various sectors of Catholics, Baptists, evangelicals, etc.
At times it is mind boggling!
What is a JH?
I was under the impression the oaths were quietly dropped in the 1970's.
One portion of the temple script that was dropped quietly was in 1990 -- and it was the portion depicting Christian pastors as lackeys/tools of Satan.
The portion I referenced was one that the Lds "prophet" had studied for several years in the 20s...and was still there til 1926 or 1927. Here was the oath temple Mormons uttered then:
You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will pray and never cease to pray to Almighty God to avenge the blood of the prophets upon this nation, and that you will teach the same to your children and to your children's children unto the third and fourth generation. Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2335353/posts
So this oath -- which was removed by 1927 -- was sworn to be taught actually to FOUR Mormon generations from that point. Three of those Mormon generations are still around!
But, hey, why would the future Mormons want to commit mass murder, anyway, when outright slavery at least takes advantage of free labor?
What do I mean? LDS "apostle" Orson Hyde said: “What the world calls ‘Mormonism’ will rule every nation...God has decreed it, and his own right arm will accomplish it. This will make the heathen rage.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 53)
So, if this Mormon "apostle"'s prophesy was correct...the rule would I guess begin with Romney, eh?
The various fringe fundamentalist groups are legitimately, IMO, considered by outsiders as part of the Mormon movement.
They are NOT part of the “official and orthodox” Mormon Church, and I’m sorry if I implied otherwise.
However, they are, IMO, much closer to the original spirit of the early Mormons. Joe Smith would be right at home in the FLDS and wildly out of place in Temple Square.
Your mileage may vary.
Well, AFAIK they haven’t massacred 100+ Gentile men, women and children anytime in the last 150 years.
That qualifies as mellowing, in my book.
Except bearing false witness (accusing people of "hating" Mormons) isn't exactly loving of your neighbor.
I wouldn't be here but for Mormons. I am a direct descendant of one; I have extended family which are Mormons whom I love...and Szonian, who often posts on these threads, is an ex-Mormon who is still married to one -- and he loves his wife. (And he's not alone)
You cannot assume being against the "ism" of Mormonism = hating the person -- anymore than being against homosexuality would somehow = hating homosexuals.
If you don't a pro-homosexual position, does that mean you "hate" them?
Are you saying all the parents out there who would love for their adult child to come out of homosexuality "hate" them if they expose that lifestyle for what it is?
If you don't have a gray zone, well, then, let's see if you're consistent on this one.
So what? George Bush signed more pro-life legislation than any President in history (his first veto was used to stop embryonic stem cell experiments) and people on this site still insist he wasn’t a “real conservative”. So what difference does it make? No Republican will ever be conservative enough and so the Left will now always win.
Well, it's not quite as you described.
Utah became a state in the mid-1890s. Were they denouncing polygamy then?
No.
Many of their Mormon neighbors and Mormon family were still polygamists still living the polygamist lifestyle. When Mormons put up the polygamy caution sign in 1890, that didn't mean Mormon families-as-is split up.
They also persisted to a much smaller degree with plural unions. B. Carmon Hardy documents 260 such plural unions privately solemnized between 1890-1910. See his "Solemn Covenant" book appendix.
In 1898, Utah voters voted in Democrat B.H. Roberts as their Congressmen. Roberts was never seated as Congressman because 7 million U.S. citizens signed 28 banners delivered to Congress. They didn't appreciate the reality that Roberts had taken a third simultaneous wife in 1893. (That hardly sounds like Utah voters were "denouncing" Roberts' lifestyle)
Even in the 1960s, one Mormon poll said 40% of Mormons would re-adopt a polygamy lifestyle if their Mormon "prophet" told them to...and Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie said that the Mormon Jesus would re-institutionalize polygamy upon return.
Does that sound like a full "denouncing" of polygamy? Hardly.
Then why did Jesus take the tax collectors (hated amongst most) and prostitutes into His arms?
He did not exile them, be bought them forth in a loving way, He did NOT exile them.
Who are WE to judge? That is not up to us to do so. Spreading His word is ALL we should be doing, in a loving manner, as did He.
Never mind what we peons find "wrong" in other religions. Every religion out there has something nasty to say about the others.
He wants us to find our own way....that crooked, unlit hard to follow path that leads to Him. Downing others, I believe, is prideful.
So for now, it's just Him, myself and my Bible.
You need to explain that word, "guilt." What are the FLDS "guilty" for that hasn't also been a vital practice (past, present, future per Lds "doctrine") of the mainstream Mormons?
Past: Mormon mainstream polygamy was practiced 1831-til early 1960s when the last Mormon mainstream polygamists died out...these were ones married in the early 1900s that were officially solemnized by Lds leaders.
Present: You may not believe Mormons are still married in their afterlife. (I don't). But Mormons do. Mormons believe that even those married right now -- somebody who may drop dead tomorrow -- would remain married to that person plus a previous spouse...as long as they were sealed to both (or more) for eternity. [That hardly sounds like Mormons treating this fully like "guilty" behavior...does it? Saying that you can become eternal polygamists?]
Future: I haven't seen any Lds leader rescind Lds apostle's Bruce McConkie claim in his prominent Mormon Doctrine book, have you? McConkie said that when the Mormon Jesus returns, he would re-institutionalize polygamy.
To hear you tell it, mainstream Mormons were "only" "guilty" of practicing polygamy from 1831-early 1960s...are practicing it on another colony near Kolob now...and will be practicing it upon earth when their Jesus returns.
But, "no..." don't you dare say that mainstream LDS are like fLDS! (That might be "guilt" by association)
Or, pray tell, Tory, did you have something else in mind aside from polygamy? (Like maybe the age of the "brides" or something)
NGZ I think you are mixing apples and oranges with your comparison.
2 John 1:10 is speaking about someone (an alledged minister) bringing a different TEACHING.
You equate it with Jesus dining with the tax collectors and prostitutes - they were not bringing a teaching - they were seeking the Teacher.
Who are we to judge? Jesus commanded us to as did the apostles. How does one recognize false doctrines and teachings WITHOUT judging eh? What do we judge - the doctrine, we continue to love the individual and pray that our challenge to their doctrine helps them hear God’s true words.
Jesus never said he wants us to find our own way - Jesus said HE was THE way. That path is lit by the scriptures and the Holy Spirit.
Downing false doctrines is not downing ‘others’, but follows the scriptural mandate to rebuke false teachings. Your apparent difficulty is that you cannot separate the two.
“So; can I infer that your family are MORMON and in Texas?”
Yes, your inference is correct. The fact that my family is Mormon living in Texas would probably lead some to the observation that it is different in Texas, because Mormons are in the minority there, but where Mormons are in the majority, that is where the clannish behavior will manifest itself. This is actually a fair point, but this sociological phenomenon is not uniquely attributable to Mormons in Utah. For example, I have a sister-in-law who grew up as a Catholic in Ireland, and became Mormon as a teen. She was then shunned by the other kids in her school, and her former best friend would not even speak to her for remainder of her years in High School. However, it would be wrong for me to extrapolate the ugly behavior by these kids in Catholic-majority Ireland to apply to Catholics generally. In fact, I would wager my life that every one of my Catholic friends would strongly condemn this ugly behavior. So I think it is equally wrong to extrapolate clannish behavior by some Mormons to Mormons generally.
In my book any group that leads souls away from Jesus Christ is dangerous.
The point was not about GW Bush, the point was that Romney is not pro-life.
Romney is NOT a conservative in any fashion.
Haley Barber was my guy, but Ann Coulter and his campaign manager, Lynne Cheney, thought Romney was a conservative and if he gets the nomination I'll happily vote for him.
Same thing happened with my Lutheran church, when they took it upon themselves (the "leaders") to accept homo Pastors.
I know there are some Lutheran churches who have cut off all ties with them. Personally, I believe they should remove the name Lutheran from their churches, as it is now tainted, to distinguish themselves from the pervs.
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.