Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

My Apology to Mormon Readers
Townhall.com ^ | June 5, 2013 | Mike Adams

Posted on 06/06/2013 5:44:09 AM PDT by Colofornian

Dear Stacey:

You have written demanding an apology for my recent characterization of the Mormon religion as "non-Christian." I am happy to write a public letter of apology to you and to the countless Mormon readers who responded negatively to my characterization.

I am sorry that so many of my Mormon readers have brazenly accused me of ignorance of their religion and suggested that I read the Book of Mormon. I am sorry that they were unaware that I read the Book of Mormon back in 2006.

I am sorry that the science of genetics has refuted claims made in the Book of Mormon concerning the relationship between Native Americans and Semitic people. These refutations undermine the entire historical premise of the Book of Mormon.

I am also sorry that while archeological discovery supports the claims of the Bible it clearly does not support the claims of the Book of Mormon. Battles that were supposed to have occurred in specific locations in North America simply never took place. The archeological evidence just isn't there.

I am sorry about the plagiarism of the Holy Bible that runs through the Book of Mormon. I am sorry that Mormons cannot see that Joseph Smith's refusal to reveal the golden tablets is strong evidence of their nonexistence. The heavy plagiarism in the Book of Mormon puts the lie to the rest of the story of Smith, the former seeker of the lost treasures of Captain Kidd.

I am sorry that my Mormon readers have put all their eggs in one basket by constantly writing to me quoting Matthew 7:16. So I am sorry that I must now apply that verse to the very first Mormon.

I am sorry that among the 33 well-documented plural wives of Joseph Smith, there were close to a dozen unions in which the wife was already married to another man.

I am sorry that in his lifetime, Joseph Smith married four different pairs of sisters. I am sorry that Joseph Smith married a young woman and also married her mother.

I am sorry that some of Joseph Smith's marriages were the result of religious coercion secured only after he told the prospective bride that marrying him would ensure the bride’s place in heaven. I am sorry that Smith also coerced teenagers into marrying him by promising their families a place in heaven.

I am sorry that Joseph Smith kept fourteen-year-old Helen Mar Kimball from marrying her sweetheart Horace Whitney because he wanted to marry the teenager instead. I am sorry that Joseph Smith also asked Helen’s father Heber C. Kimball to give him his wife.

I am sorry that before he eventually married Helen, Joseph Smith gave her a 24-hour deadline to give in to his offer of a place in heaven. I am sorry that two years after the death of Joseph Smith, Helen married her old sweetheart Horace Whitney. I am sorry that the marriage between Helen and Horace was only temporary because Helen was already "sealed" by marriage to Joseph Smith for eternity. I am sorry that Horace Whitney was "sealed" to an already dead Mormon woman before his “temporary” marriage to Helen.

I am sorry that after her mother died, Joseph Smith approached teenager Lucy Walker with a command that she marry Smith with the threat of eternal damnation as the punishment if she refused. I am sorry that the year before Joseph Smith died, he said the following to Lucy: “I will give you until tomorrow to decide (whether to marry me). If you reject this message the gate will be closed forever against you.”

I am sorry that the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith claims to have transcribed from the golden plates given to him by the Angel Moroni, says the following: “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, Saith the Lord.” (Jacob 2:24).

I am sorry that Joseph Smith said the following shortly before his death: "(W)hen I get my kingdom, I shall present it to my father, so that he may obtain kingdom among kingdom, and it will exalt him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take his place, and thereby become exalted myself.”

I am sorry that Smith’s polytheism is not consistent with John 14:6. I am also sorry that since these are the words of Christ, polytheism cannot be Christian. Moreover, I am sorry, my Mormon friends, but the the words of Christ trump the words of Joseph Smith who will never be God.

I am sorry that Mormonism teaches that Christ was not there in the beginning, that god was just a man who became God by following a moral code he did not create, and that we may all become gods by following the same moral code that predates the existence of Jesus. I am sorry that the theological mess caused by Joseph Smith is irreconcilable with the teachings of the Holy Bible.

Finally, I am sorry that my Mormon readers have unfairly accused me of criticizing Mormonism without doing my homework. But I am glad I did. Now I understand the significance of Galatians 1:6-9.


TOPICS: History; Other Christian; Other non-Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: aduplicate; bookofmormon; inman; josephsmith; lds; mormonism
From the column: Dear Stacey: You have written demanding an apology for my recent characterization of the Mormon religion as "non-Christian." I am happy to write a public letter of apology to you and to the countless Mormon readers who responded negatively to my characterization. I am sorry that...

...so many of my Mormon readers have brazenly accused me of ignorance of their religion and suggested that I read the Book of Mormon...
...they were unaware that I read the Book of Mormon back in 2006...
...the science of genetics has refuted claims made in the Book of Mormon concerning the relationship between Native Americans and Semitic people. These refutations undermine the entire historical premise of the Book of Mormon...
...while archeological discovery supports the claims of the Bible it clearly does not support the claims of the Book of Mormon. Battles that were supposed to have occurred in specific locations in North America simply never took place. The archeological evidence just isn't there.

1 posted on 06/06/2013 5:44:09 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

John Sheridan (Babylon 5) likes how that was written


2 posted on 06/06/2013 6:02:20 AM PDT by Bidimus1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
...the science of genetics has refuted claims made in the Book of Mormon concerning the relationship between Native Americans and Semitic people. These refutations undermine the entire historical premise of the Book of Mormon...

Don't know about Mr. Adams, but I do know that some of the opponents of Mormonism who are perfectly willing to use science as ammo against the Mormons are unwilling to accept other types of scientific evidence when it conflicts with their own belief system.

3 posted on 06/06/2013 6:08:18 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
saw this yesterday - why the repost?

entirely true btw

4 posted on 06/06/2013 6:09:17 AM PDT by Revelation 911 (hump scratching n'er do well.....all strung out on chicken wings and venison jerky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3027456/posts

Yesterday’s news.....


5 posted on 06/06/2013 6:17:24 AM PDT by Utah Binger (Southern Utah where the world comes to see America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Is this becoming a serial post? Wasn’t it on yesterday and the day before?


6 posted on 06/06/2013 6:38:38 AM PDT by X-spurt (Republic of Texas, Come and Take It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Thank you for reposting. I missed it yesterday and would never have seen it. Mike Adams did a great job.


7 posted on 06/06/2013 7:02:31 AM PDT by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Your comparison of Mormonism with Christianity doesn’t work (although I understand you don’t see it that way). The former is a manmade cult; the latter is the ultimate Truth.

“Scientific evidence”, or anything else which doesn’t line up with God’s word, simply doesn’t hold water.


8 posted on 06/06/2013 7:16:08 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon; Sherman Logan
Actually, Catherine, I disagree with your POV that independent scientific evidence doesn't matter in comparison with Biblical revelation.

Quite the contrary: actual scientific evidence (i.e. that which conforms to the actual physical reality of the natural world, when correctly interpreted) is just as authoritative as Scripture (the Biblical texts, correctly interpreted). This is because the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture both have the same Author, God Himself, working through natural secondary causes; and God is reasonable and coherent, and tells a consistent, well-ordered testimony of Himself and His works.

This is the whole point of "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament proclaims His handiwork" and related verses. This is also the whole point of the Christian revelation which identified God with Logos --- the Reason behind every form of knowledge and wisdom.

9 posted on 06/06/2013 8:03:28 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos, en pros ton Theon kai Theos en ho Logos. John 1:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: don-o
Mine at #9.
10 posted on 06/06/2013 8:04:32 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos, en pros ton Theon kai Theos en ho Logos. John 1:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
"unwilling to accept other types of scientific evidence ...There is an excellent book on how 50% of what we were taught proves to be wrong over time . Its that further investigation or discovery refutes what was formerly taught as fact.
11 posted on 06/06/2013 8:08:38 AM PDT by virgil283 ( ... """"A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore."''''''' ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Don't know about Mr. Adams, but I do know that some of the opponents of Mormonism who are perfectly willing to use science as ammo against the Mormons are unwilling to accept other types of scientific evidence when it conflicts with their own belief system.

Example please?

12 posted on 06/06/2013 8:12:16 AM PDT by Gamecock ("Ultimately, Jesus died to save us from the wrath of God." ¬óR.C. Sproul)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Excellent work by Mike Adams. Any thoughtful Mormon should read ponder and act accordingly by finding the closest Bible believing church of their choice.


13 posted on 06/06/2013 8:15:13 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Wow! That’s a keeper! Must make copies and keep them next to the door in case any Mormons come a knocking.


14 posted on 06/06/2013 8:38:07 AM PDT by dragonblustar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
Quite the contrary: actual scientific evidence (i.e. that which conforms to the actual physical reality of the natural world, when correctly interpreted) is just as authoritative as Scripture (the Biblical texts, correctly interpreted). This is because the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture both have the same Author, God Himself, working through natural secondary causes; and God is reasonable and coherent, and tells a consistent, well-ordered testimony of Himself and His works.

Let me guess: by "correctly interpreted" you mean the first eleven chapters of Genesis reduced to "didactic mythology" because they clash with "science," am I correct?

Why don't you allow "science" to sit in judgment on the virgin birth, the resurrection of J*sus, etc.? Why do you suddenly throw "science" away when it tells you such things could not have possibly happened? Why are only the first eleven chapters of Genesis thrown into the garbage can?

Talk about inconsistency in the use of "science" to overrule the Bible!

15 posted on 06/06/2013 8:46:21 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
Thank you for reposting. I missed it yesterday and would never have seen it. Mike Adams did a great job.

I missed it yesterday too.

I've read a lot by Adams and always enjoyed the direct and truthful way he presents whatever subject he is writing about. Never saw anything by him before about Mormonism, glad to see that he is truthful, knowledgeable and direct about it too.

16 posted on 06/06/2013 8:46:56 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (_.. ._. .. _. _._ __ ___ ._. . ___ ..._ ._ ._.. _ .. _. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Don't know about Mr. Adams, but I do know that some of the opponents of Mormonism who are perfectly willing to use science as ammo against the Mormons are unwilling to accept other types of scientific evidence when it conflicts with their own belief system.

I have noticed this as well. But don't forget the evolutionist chrstians who subject Genesis 1-11 to scientific critique but who get on their knees and become "as little children" with the miracles and alleged supernatural phenomena of "the new testament."

17 posted on 06/06/2013 8:49:20 AM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

So are you claiming that the scientific DNA evidence of the American Indian/Asian connection, instead of the Mormon claimed Jewish heredity is a miracle?


18 posted on 06/06/2013 9:05:16 AM PDT by colorcountry (The gospel will transform our politics, not vice versa (Romans 12:1,2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o; CatherineofAragon
actual scientific evidence....is just as authoritative as Scripture

God's Word always was.... evidence changes and/or added - so to say it is 'just as authoritative as Scripture' shows one doesn't KNOW His inspired Word.

There is no Book of Nature. Through nature one can study the universe and name every star but that shows ALL He created and how Mighty He is - but it doesn't get one to KNOW Him, personally, and that is done through His Word ONLY. Many know 'of' Him but not HIM, personally. That is done by The Spirit. One must know God by The Spirit and worship Him in The Spirit.

God is SPIRIT and not nature. Let all the 'mother earth' and tree huggers weep as they worship His creation and NOT HIM!

"God is Spirit, and His worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in Truth." John 4:24

And God's Holy Spirit inspired Word is the only TRUTH there is and that makes it The FINAL Authority!

And no one can get to The Father BUT through His Son, JESUS!!

"Jesus saith unto him, I am The Way, The Truth, and The LIFE: no man cometh unto The Father, but by Me." John 14:6

19 posted on 06/06/2013 9:07:47 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: X-spurt

I didn’t see it. And perhaps it should be reposted tomorrow. There isn’t a time limit for truth.


20 posted on 06/06/2013 9:16:02 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I’m afraid I’m unfamiliar with the “Book of Nature”, Mrs. Don-o. But, aside from that, I stand by my assertion. Science is nothing but the branch of discovery by which we. as Christians, attempt to discover and use the principles of the universe created by the Lord. It is limited by our fallible human natures and in no way can be given equal footing with Scripture.

We have to remember that not all of what is known as “science” agrees with the Bible....notably the theory of evolution. I don’t know if this is what you mean when you mention secondary causes, or reason and coherence. When science contradicts Scripture, and evolution does, we have to make a choice what we will believe.

God IS a God of reason and coherence, because He is Truth. But He is also a God of unknowable mysteries and astonishing miracles.


21 posted on 06/06/2013 9:36:55 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Thanks for the re post, missed it before.


22 posted on 06/06/2013 9:43:01 AM PDT by ForAmerica (Texas Conservative Christian Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Everything I know about Mormons and Joseph Smith I learned from South Park.


23 posted on 06/06/2013 9:46:41 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
I've read a lot by Adams and always enjoyed the direct and truthful way he presents whatever subject he is writing about.

Mike Adams is a good writer, and also a pretty good 8th inning guy for the Phillies.

24 posted on 06/06/2013 9:48:52 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Should seem to be too obvious. But here goes.

A great many conservative Christians reject the theory of evolution because it conflicts with the Bible.

Now this is, IMO, a position that can be argued. But it is not possible to argue that the vast majority of scientific evidence does not point towards the truth that evolution takes place. Without evolution the whole notion of living things being organized into hierarchies of “related” organisms makes no sense.

Personally, I believe God created life and the evolutionary process. I see it as the equivalent in biology of free will in sentient beings.

God could have created spirit beings and humans with no free will. But he didn’t. He apparently wanted friends, not slaves, and was interested in having things happen other than what he directly caused to happen.

I see similar mechanisms in evolution, though I don’t discount the possibility that he could of course intervene in the process when he chose. Evolution was the method God chose to use to create the wild diversity of life we see around us.

I realize a lot of Christians disagree, and I respect their opinions. I just think they are wrong.


25 posted on 06/06/2013 9:50:53 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
A great many conservative Christians reject the theory of evolution because it conflicts with the Bible.....Now this is, IMO, a position that can be argued

So you choose to argue w/God? His Word is to be BELIEVED and not argued with.

Without evolution the whole notion of living things being organized into hierarchies of “related” organisms makes no sense.

We are to BELIEVE as it is written and 'NOT lean unto your own understanding' despite what 'natural evidence' you think there is and/or what doesn't 'make sense'. You really think with your natural mind you can understand the supernatural things of God? That is PRIDE!

Jesus says...'only believe'. You can be argumentative all you want, disobedient and prideful - it will get you nowhere and/or somewhere you don't want to be.

It doesn't take faith to 'see' something in the natural.

"Without faith no one can please God."

Who are you trying to please?

26 posted on 06/06/2013 10:08:56 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
The Bible and the natural sciences are in agreement when correctly interpreted. If you see an obvious discrepancy, you -- not God, you --- are in error in the way you are interpreting either the physical or the Scriptural evidence.

Neither I nor the Catholic Church "throw the first 11 chapters of Genesis in the garbage can."

For instance, there are at least 4 different ways to interpret the word "day" in the Creation accounts. The Catholic Church does not rule for or against any one of them as a matter of dogma.

There are likewise a half a dozen major, different ways to account for the biological diversity of life on earth. (Here I'm including even wild ones like Francis Crick's idea of "panspermia.") Catholic Church does not rule for or against any one of them as a matter of dogma, either.

I think the Cathoic Church shows an admirable and humble restraint in areas where our knowledge is so decisively incomplete.

But we've been around the block on this several times before, ZC. I will refrain from getting into it with you again.

27 posted on 06/06/2013 10:10:42 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos, en pros ton Theon kai Theos en ho Logos. John 1:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon; presently no screen name
When I said "Book of Nature" I meant that as a figure of speech for all we can know of the natural world in terms of evidence, and reasonable inferences from evidence. When I say it has the same Author as the Bible, I mean that God is the Master of all reality, and not just the Master of the text.

And Catherine, I fully agree with this statement of yours:

"God IS a God of reason and coherence, because He is Truth. But He is also a God of unknowable mysteries and astonishing miracles."

Well said. We're on the same page there.

28 posted on 06/06/2013 10:20:59 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos, en pros ton Theon kai Theos en ho Logos. John 1:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I am sorry that Joe Smith modelled himself after Mohammed.


29 posted on 06/06/2013 11:06:04 AM PDT by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"Neither I nor the Catholic Church "throw the first 11 chapters of Genesis in the garbage can.""

God's concept of creation and of Himself is manifest in the Logos, that perfect system of all truth, beauty, goodness, order, precision and harmony. Those things discoverable empirically and with human reason do not require Divine Revelation, but are rather Natural Revelation. Whether math, physics, biochemistry, and even scientifically observable phenomenon and processes as the adaptation of species within a dynamic environment are all equally miraculous. An Old Testament pedagogy, absent an understanding of the Logos, cannot understand or explain Natural Revelation, only deny it.

Peace be with you

30 posted on 06/06/2013 11:19:19 AM PDT by Natural Law (Jesus did not leave us a book, He left us a Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TexasRepublic
"I am sorry that Joe Smith modelled himself after Mohammed."

That is a brilliant observation. Islam was initially classified as a Christian heresy when it first appeared, but when the degree of error was properly recognized it transcended heresy. Similarly, Mormonism, drawing heavily (but not completely) upon Christian Scripture transcended heresy only by the degree to which it embraced and exceeded the operating principles of Protestantism.

Peace be with you

31 posted on 06/06/2013 11:24:09 AM PDT by Natural Law (Jesus did not leave us a book, He left us a Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you, Mrs. Don-o. God’s blessings to you.


32 posted on 06/06/2013 11:41:15 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
But don't forget the evolutionist chrstians who subject Genesis 1-11 to scientific critique but who get on their knees and become "as little children" with the miracles and alleged supernatural phenomena of "the new testament."I don't see a problem with this.

We actually have zero evidence that the Virgin Birth did not occur, whereas we have lots of evidence, IMO, that evolution did occur. The only reason we can offer for disbelief in the Virgin Birth of Christ is that we've never seen such a birth. But that I've never seen a black swan or a little green man is not proof they don't exist.

IOW, the general tenor of past history can be determined from the evidence. Occasional miraculous interventions, which to my mind are just God making an exception to the rules, cannot be disproven by scientific means. Or, of course, proven using the same methods.

33 posted on 06/06/2013 11:46:58 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bidimus1

bttt


34 posted on 06/06/2013 1:00:00 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("There can be no dialogue with the prince of this world." -- Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Evolution is simply an often repeated fraud. It cannot stand close examination. The first 3 chapters of Genesis is most certainly true, as is the whole of the Bible.


35 posted on 06/06/2013 1:44:34 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“The Bible and the natural sciences are in agreement when correctly interpreted.”


The false premise here is that human beings who “read the book of nature” are infallible like the scripture. I’ve read the Book of Nature myself, and reject them.


36 posted on 06/06/2013 1:48:18 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
all we can know of the natural world in terms of evidence, and reasonable inferences from evidence.

I wasn't looking for your Book of Nature to be explained! However, it still has NOTHING to do about KNOWING God! It shows that HE IS ALMIGHTY which we already know through His Word. The world He made for man to enjoy and He did it ALL in the days prior to HE making man.

When I say it has the same Author as the Bible, I mean that God is the Master of all reality, and not just the Master of the text.

EVIL is real - are you saying God is the Master of that, also? Master of the text? It is text to you? IT is HIS Spoken Word divinely inspired by HIS OWN SPIRIT!

Why did you leave out the part I responded to... your actual scientific evidence....is just as authoritative as Scripture

'Man' having evidence of God's creation is equivalent to GOD'S WORD??? Seems you have lifted up 'man' to God status.

37 posted on 06/06/2013 2:28:51 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
No, I'm not lifting up man to God's status. That would be an absurdity, since our knowledge and virtue are as nothing compared with His.

I am saying that God spoke, and all things came to be, an exact representation of what He willed. So we can discern His Word in both what He created and what He inspired.

God did not create Evil per se. Evil exists because God created wills which were capable of opposing His will, and some of them did. It is a privation of the good, since Evil cannot create anything, it can only grab and twist, pollute and ruin what God made; it can just say "No."

God IS the Master of all things. The devils in Hell know this, and tremble.

38 posted on 06/06/2013 2:53:10 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("In Christ we form one body, and each member belongs to all the others." Romans 12:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“No, I’m not lifting up man to God’s status. That would be an absurdity, since our knowledge and virtue are as nothing compared with His.”


You lifted up evolutionary theory, a creation of man, to the level of infallible scripture. If evolution is true, there is no doctrine of original sin, since, actually, all the organisms in the world were living and dying and “evolving” long before death could enter the world through Adam’s fall.


39 posted on 06/06/2013 3:18:22 PM PDT by Greetings_Puny_Humans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon; Mrs. Don-o

Archbishop Sheen spoke a great deal about science. I concur with him that human scientific undertakings are merely the discovery of what already exists because God has created it.

No scientist has ever created something from nothing.

I agree with you, Mrs. Don-o that Catherine’s statement is a keeper.


40 posted on 06/06/2013 3:26:57 PM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jvette

Very kind of you, Jvette.


41 posted on 06/06/2013 5:31:15 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
No, I'm not lifting up man to God's status. That would be an absurdity, since our knowledge and virtue are as nothing compared with His.

Then why did you say actual scientific evidence ...is just as authoritative as Scripture? You say one thing and when questioned you say something different and what is already known. The little dance of evading to back up your own words of scientific evidence ...is just as authoritative as Scripture is noted in each post.

So we can discern His Word in both what He created and what He inspired.

Christians BELIEVE His Word - and His Word is spiritually discerned. His Word can't be discerned through nature but by His Spirit.

Again, here's another non answer God did not create Evil per se.

I posted 'Evil is real and is God the master of that? in response to your I mean that God is the Master of all reality. BACKING away from your own words, once again, we not desire to correct your own words.

and not just the Master of the text.

Text? What is 'text' about this...

"For the Word of God is ALIVE and ACTIVE. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." Heb 4:6

Man made teachings are text, merely, words instituted by man to be believe by those easily duped/deceived. “in order that no advantage be taken of us by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his schemes” (2 Corinthians 2:11)

Now back to your first words of this post No, I'm not lifting up man to God's status. That would be an absurdity, since our knowledge and virtue are as nothing compared with His.

Yet you believe in the 'infallibility' of certain men? So much for your 'no, I'm not lifting up man to God's status'.

42 posted on 06/07/2013 1:53:59 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
"Then why did you say actual scientific evidence ...is just as authoritative as Scripture?"

Because they are both the works of God. Neither one depends upon man at all. Yes, man can try to interpret the natural world, its characteristics and laws, just as he tries to interpret Scripture, but God is the author and creator of both, in a manner that indicates His greatness, and not man's greatness.

The misunderstanding, here, may possibly arise from the idea that Scripture is God's but science is man's. This division does not hold.

And "infallibility"? No, I do not believe that any man (other than Christ) is infallible in the positive sense you evidently mean. I do know that no man has the power to lead the whole Church into error on questions of faith and morals. Please notice that this does not refer us to any particular man's (for instance, the Pope's) power, but his powerlessness: he will not be able to do it.

43 posted on 06/07/2013 2:36:01 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Woe to those who call evil good and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o
"Then why did you say actual scientific evidence ...is just as authoritative as Scripture?"

Because they are both the works of God. Neither one depends upon man at all.

Wow! Assigning 'seeking scientific evidence' to what 'man/evil does' to GOD??

What part of FAITH excludes you? What part of Hear and Obey and 'only BELIEVE' is repulsive to you? What part of Thomas wanting 'evidence' excites you?

The misunderstanding, here..

There was no misunderstanding your words. So you are suggesting....confusion. Not surprised about that either.

Mortal man 'seeking scientific evidence' of the works of supernatural God and His universe is not a work of God BUT a work of PRIDE!! As is those who cannot understand/confused about God's Words..."And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day....And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day...And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

There is nothing confusing about that - but those who think it is - are pawns of satan because that's what he does cause confusion and they oblige him....Did God really say?

I know what God created and it's not evil and it's not confusion and it's not wanting 'evidence'. One either believes ...hear and obeys His Word or they don't.

And "infallibility"? No, I do not believe that any man (other than Christ) is infallible in the positive sense you evidently mean. I do know that no man has the power to lead the whole Church into error on questions of faith and morals. Please notice that this does not refer us to any particular man's (for instance, the Pope's) power, but his powerlessness: he will not be able to do it.

Lots of gobbly gook and doubt speak there. Man is either infallible or he isn't! It is a either 'yes' or 'no' or it's more of 'not hearing and obeying' His Word.... "God is no respector of persons" and there is ONLY ONE GOD! And HIS CHURCH is based on HIS WORD ALONE and it has no errors. Only a counterfeit church is riddled with damnable errors through 'man-made teachings' which is their final authority and where man submits to man whic is satan's kingdom.

NO MAN is infallible - only satan wants to proclaim someone is infallible so 'man' can be lifted up as God - what he proclaimed he would do and he did through it through Rome.

GOD'S WORD is the FINAL AUTHORITY. Man either submits to GOD ALONE or by default he submits to evil/man with it's man-made teachings. Submit wholly to God or there is no submission to God and the children of the dark remain the children of the dark.

44 posted on 06/07/2013 4:04:07 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

God bless you. Bye.


45 posted on 06/07/2013 5:42:04 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (When you see a fork in the road, take it. - Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

“Everything I know about Mormons and Joseph Smith I learned from South Park.”

Thanks for honesty. That’s not a very reliable source.
www.mormon.org
www.lds.org


46 posted on 06/08/2013 4:25:50 PM PDT by District13 (I miss my country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Apology not accepted.

www.mormon.org
www.lds.org


47 posted on 06/08/2013 6:29:04 PM PDT by District13 (I miss my country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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