Skip to comments.Why Mormonism will Surrender to Homosexuality
Posted on 02/13/2013 4:44:23 AM PST by spirited irish
click here to read article
Christians do, having been given that authority by God through his apostle:
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Gal. 1:8
Provide an example or two; and maybe we clods will learn how to be more effective.
'Til then; my 2*4 upside the head will have to do.
If you have cable TV, there wont be much on to watch.
If there isnt much on to watch, you will answer your door whenever someone rings.
If you open your door, you will see mormons.
If you talk to mormons, they will trick you into praying about whether something is true.
If you rely on your feelings, you may become a mormon.
If you become a mormon, you will have to wear magic underwear!
If you wear magic underwear, people will immediately label you as a cultist.
DONT be a cultist!
Information place mark
Any place that a MORMON has the nerve to start spouting any of their HERESY will turn in to a BASH.
Love the ink-blot Joseph.
bashing? How so?
Doesn’t treat women equally——like Mormonism?
I imagine you saw my earlier post about attempting to compare doctrinal differences to blasphemous teachings. Christians differ on, IMO, minor points. Mormonism teaches stuff that doesn’t even begin to resemble Christianity.
I don’t know if you’re a Christian, but take, for example, the Mormon doctrine which says God impregnated Mary. Doesn’t that make your soul cringe?
What a coincidence. That's the same thing Torquemada said.
When you post a Southern Baptist thread be sure and ping everyone -K?
Wouldn’t that depend on whose definition of Christianity you are using?
Well if you want Christianity you read and believe the Bible...
If you dont want Christianity but some other religion, you read the book of Mormon and get the indigestion of Mormonism or the koran and get under the burka of Islam..
then theres the religious writings of the other religions, several mush more interesting and believable than the bom, and you might want to try them...
as for me and my house, though, we will serve THE Lord” Joshua 24:15
THE Lord is Jesus Christ the Righteous..
He is God of the Christian Bible..
He is eternal, forever, He has always been...
He is the Creator...
Everything was created from nothing...
and nothing was made that was not made through Him...
Big difference right there in what Christians beleve and what is contained in the beliefs and doctrines of Mormonism..
While God in the Christian Bible states “God is not man” Numbers 23:19
Mormonism has a basic premise that the Mormon gods were men who worked up to and finally earned godhood..
The reast of that last verse is “(God is not a man) that He should lie”
The Judeo-Christian God is unchangeable and has never lied nor will He ever...
The Mormon god and gods lie constantly...
One day the Mormons claim it has said some doctrine is forever, and the next their Mormon god or gods has changed its mind and wants them to go in a different direction, none of them Biblical or Godly..
Mormon doctrines are directly influenced by the current social and political atmosphere..
The LORD God of the Christian Bible could care less about whether Willard ever got elected, He never fell off His throne at that failure of the Mormon gods..
Unlike the Mormon gods, The LORD God of the Christians isnt led by the nose with history...He is the author of history..
While the God of the Christian Bible is dependable, the Mormons have had a bumpy unsteady time in the “evolvement” of their doctrines as suggested by their “progressive” gods..
Is it any wonder that Mormons deny and reject the Bible ???
The Bible proves that Joey Smith was never a prophet and that the Mormon gods are not divine nor righteous but are the invention of secular lustful greedy evil men...
Yes, Elsie, that is true, and also fair.
But we all have seen threads turn to "bashing" on the mere mention of Utah in the article, even if the subject is Arches National Park and has nothing to do with mormons beyond vacinity.
I couldn't care less if you were suspicious of me being a Satanist building a basement using babies' skulls for bricks.
And with that, I need to run off now. I’ll try to stop by this evening to respond.
If God did not make Mary pregnant, then who did?
But thanks for proving my point. You have elected yourself arbiter of this matter. It is you who gets to decide what constitutes a mere doctrinal difference and what constitutes blasphemy. You allow some religions to get a free pass when it comes to obeying scripture, writing it off as "doctrinal differences". Yet you come down hard on others for some crazy idea that God had something to do with Mary becoming pregnant. It reminds me of Christ's words to those about to stone Mary Magdalene. He didn't say, 'those who haven't committed adultery throw the first stone'. He said 'those who are without sin'.
I agree, but you are leaving out the OT. It takes a leap of faith to believe a man named Noah built a giant ship and saved civilization by loading all species onto the ship. Could that be a metaphore or simply a story to teach a greater lesson? Historical records are going to be more reliable from David’s time around 1,500 BC and certainly around Christ’s time than Genesis.
Yes, much of the Bible (both OT and NT) is historical and none of that to my knowledge has been proven false. Much of what is in the Bible is teaching and philosophy and we are to believe that is the Word of God. Much of it are letters and stories of the apostles using various styles to convert various groups. And again, you still discount the human element. The Apostles and Gospel authors were great men no doubt, but did God write their letters or were they simply inspired by the Holy Spirit to spread the Good News, but the words writen were their own slants or sales speels and not God’s actual words. The fact is, the NT Bible passages were chosen by the Council of Nicea under the authority of the Pope and the Emperor Constantine. You have to figure the final product was some kind of debate/compromise as there were thousands of passages, stories, and Gospels that were left out. Not anywhere near every account of Christ made the cut. In the end, you still had a council of human beings deciding what was the Word of God and what was heresy... and there are plenty of heresies that could have been included that conflict with what made the cut. So, if you believe the Bible and nothing but the Bible is the Word of God, you believe that God pulled the puppet strings on much human interaction among the early Christians. Personally, I struggle with it a bit.
Okay, I see. You don’t recognize Scriptural authority, you’re into the politically-correct idea of “not judging”......and you’re fine with blasphemy, even agree with it.
No need in going further here. You have a nice day.
That won’t be happening. I don’t feel the need to begin multiple threads attacking other religions solely for the purpose of assuaging my own fears. I was simply pointing out the double-standard.
Or you could expose the doctrinal errors. Remember, most “Mormon-bashing” consists of people using the church’s own words. If I went to the UMC website and posted the church’s own words, that’s not Methodist bashing. If I posted John Wesley’s own words, that’s not Methodist bashing. If I posted John Knox’s own words, that’s not Presbyterian bashing.
The difference is this: I am allowed and willing to criticize my church when it is wrong. And I do so quite often. When a Mormon is confronted with the words of the church or its leaders, they can have several responses.
Example: The church says God lives on the planet Kolob.
1. That is factually incorrect.
2. That is correct but I don’t believe that myself
3. That is correct and I believe it is true
4. You are bashing my religion.
For some reason, #4 seems to be the default answer.
If someone came in and said “John Wesley didn’t want to split with the Anglican church”, as a Methodist I would respond with #2 and never #4.
lds practice polygamy they do not think its wrong.
Many lds groups openly practice, some hide it, the SLC lds have their celestial marriage “marrying people after they die”.
It is not possible to be in the high level of celestial being with out many wives.
But, hey only 15% or so of lds reach this level, so maybe the other levels do not need multi wives.
You are almost there...
Well, that would not be mormonISM.
“If God did not make Mary pregnant, then who did?”
Not who. What. The Holy Spirit. It was a miracle. She remained a virgin even though she were pregnant. There was no sex.
I am talking about the authority of the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints, which has been against polygamy in doctrine since the 19th century. Yes, there are offshoots that still practice it and are consistent with the teachings in their book, but those offshoots are considered heretical by the mother church.
Except mormonISM does not oppose either.
Then where is your opposition to mormonISM?
Actually, I do. I simply pointed out where you anointed yourself as the one to pick and choose which scriptures are worthy of the 'heresy' label and which ones do not.
br>youre into the politically-correct idea of not judging....
Actually, it was Jesus' idea. You obviously don't recognize scriptural authority when you see it.
..and youre fine with blasphemy, even agree with it.
Neither am I fine with it nor have I ever agreed with it.
No need in going further here. You have a nice day.
So this is how you end it by falsely attributing positions to me which I do not hold in order for you to escape being challenged? You have a nice day as well.
Who said anything about sex?
Oh man. That would be awesome. :)
n 1832, Jesus Christ appeared in a vision to Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon. Both men saw and conversed with him (D&C 76:14) and also witnessed a vision of the kingdoms to which mankind will be assigned in the life hereafter.
The Lord also appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in April 1836 in the Kirtland Temple shortly after its dedication and manifested his acceptance of this first latter-day temple (D&C 110:1-10).
And then of course when Jesus was born, and also when Jesus came to America and killed all those people, so really way more than three times.
You raise excellent questions regarding biblical authority.
Now, my question is this. Who do you regard as the highest authority concerning what counts as canon? Which books did they say count?
That’s an LDS teaching. God had sex with Mary.
I really don’t discount the human element. Earlier I posted that the accuracy of the documents is nearly 100%....to be exact, 99.5%. If God alone was involved, it would be 100%.
The Council of Nicea came together to deal with the heresy of Arianism, which held that Jesus was a man (much like Mormonism). You say there were compromises, but we don’t know that. We have no evidence to support such a claim. At the time, the early church was already using books which were agreed upon to be undisputed canon (the Gospels and Paul’s letters).
As for Noah, it took him decades to build the ark, and Scripture says that the animals came to him and went onto it. Clearly those animals would have had to be led by God to do so. And I don’t need much faith to believe that, really. The biggest miracle of all-—Creation——had already occurred, so yeah, I can believe the ark account.
And you would be wrong. SLC lds practice polygamy.
Not everyone of course, but the 15% temple worthy do and a few who hide the deed.
Polygamy is necessary for the highest level of celestial being.
There is a reason SLC lds is pushing (not opposing) homosexuals.....that becomes legal then open polygamy will follow.
Well and truly stated. But of course the one to whom you responded isn’t interested in truth as it comes to these threads to play contrarian.
The lds-org denies that Jesus is the Creator, that everything was created BY Him.
Pray they repent of their falsehoods and see the Truth.
The lds-org is a thief of the Name and the Truth of Jesus Christ.
Thanks for the insight. I disagree, but I guess that is why I am Catholic... have 2,000 years of history filled with examples of free will leading to human flaw faltering the Word of God.
Yeah but it will inform the lurkers and edify the FI...
“What a coincidence. That’s the same thing Torquemada said.”
So? What’s your point? If one person uses the Bible to wrongly justify something, then nobody can justify anything based on the Bible?
Sorry, but you're wrong. I used to see the "not judge" thing from liberals and non-believers in chat rooms and on forums. I'm not saying you're either, but you don't understand the Scripture any more than they do.
Jesus never forbade judging. He taught us how TO judge. If you look at Matthew 7 1:5, He is instructing us not to judge if we are doing the same thing we are judging. In the last sentence, He tells us to make sure we are not guilty of that, and THEN to make our judgement.
In Matthew 7:15, Jesus tells us to beware of false prophets (like Joseph Smith). How are we supposed to tell what's false and what's true unless we make a judgement?
John 7:24 says: Do not judge according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment. Judge based on the truth---on Scripture. You might not want to judge, but you have no right to tell me or anyone else not to do so. When you do, you are contradicting what the Bible tells me, and when it comes down to you or it, which do you think I'm going to pick?
1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 says, "Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. You are saying we should not test all things.
1 John 4:1 tells us to test the spirits. Again, a judgement must be made.
Wolfman, I’m not Catholic, but I consider us brother and sister in Christ. Maybe one day when we meet in Heaven we’ll laugh about our differences.
Why are you afraid, someone will challenge you?
Maybe defend what you beleive if anything, does that cause you angst?
Come on hoodat, run from your fear....take the challenge, post threads in the religion forum exposing Christianity.
Truth about Mormonism is bashing? Check out the bible on false prophets.
Incidentally, the main premise of the opening article was not even addressed until the end. It's is worth noting that the Mormon Church was included in the process of writing legislation for Utah. I wish other churches were consulted in the same way for drafting legislation in their own states. But I think it is a stretch to conclude that the Mormon Church will surrender to homosexuality this early in the process. Perhaps the heretic police here should be targeting those denominations who have already surrendered.
That’s pretty weird. Do you happen to have a link for that?