What is the difference between Mormons and Jehovah's witness?

[fatboys]

=Sigmar;59437310

We where created to live forever, to know God personally, to reflect his moral character - his love - through human relationships, and to exercise dominion over the rest of the living creatures on earth. From the biblical teaching on the image of God there is nothing which would warrant the conclusion that men are or ever will be " Gods" or even little gods.

Still for what reason? Why did God create when he did if he had existed for eons? I mean to reflect his moral character, what on earth does that mean? And why did God say that after Adam and Eve had partaken of the fruit, that they had become as one of them?

 

[ldsfaqs]

But that could be said for every single denomination and sect in the world today. The question is, why should I believe any one group's interpretation of the scriptures as being the only proper interpretation? I'm sure you are a Mormon for exactly the same reasons that other people are Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholics, Baptists, and Pentecostals. So what exactly is it about Mormons' interpretations of the scriptures that should make me want to be a Mormon? Please understand I am not picking on Mormons in particular, but on every religious group that claims to have the absolute truth and the only correct understanding of the scriptures.

I understand completely your concern.....

But, I would ask you to not give up, and to know that the actual truth IS out there, the one that does not mix the doctrines of men with the doctrines of God.

Just look at my example in the previous post. I entirely debunked a belief that is had by nearly all other Christians with a verse only a few verses later.
I'm not asking you to simply believe me, I only would ask that you fairly and objectively compare.

Just to give you some of my background. I spent years in most of the major Christian religions, and some minor. With such an experience I wasn't beholden to no religions particular interpretation or ideology, thus, I would read the Bible for myself, and because of the variety of religions, I would see how they all contrasted with each other and what the Bible actually said. I found them ALL to be lacking in many serious ways, omitting things such as my example and creating a false doctrine from it, or misinterpreting things, not following and practicing things the Bible actually said, etc.

One day, I then came upon the LDS Church. They were the ONLY religion that in FULL and accurately matched what the Bible taught. There came a point in which I didn't understand a couple of things, and I left the Church and all religion, being anti-mormon and anti-religion, but I eventually wanted to know the whole truth, I again eliminated other religions as possibly being true, and came back to mormonism. I then compared anti-mormonism with mormonism, and also the issues I had, and I came to know the actual truth, and for near 20 years now and forever faithful. I'm not in this religion because it feels good etc., but because it's literally FULLY True.

Anyway, you ask what's the difference? Well, there is almost every difference.
All other religions that claim truth are based on only the Bible.
A "true" religion one that's actually Gods, would naturally have more scripture and revelations, would have Angels, Prophets, Apostles, miracles, etc. etc.

Anyway, study it.... It's okay to compare some with it's enemy's. Such as it's okay to learn some what fanatical islam says of the Jews, or America, or the KKK of blacks. But, if you want to know a group, study IT'S BEST..... Judge the best between ALL groups, and you will come to know what's really true, what's of men, and what's of God.

If you objectively compare..... attend their churches, study their best materials, scholars, and religious leaders, study their founding events and claims.... when you do that honestly with no bias, you WILL as fatboys above said, find and know the truth from God, he WILL reveal it. I remember in my doubt..... all the different religions claiming truth, and so much information, how could one really know??? But, I had faith that God if he existed would show the truth if I simply did my part in faith and integrity and objectivity. And guess what, it actually didn't take very long to know the truth. Of course, I had years of experience to build upon it, but I started from the beginning essentially, and it came quickly.

But, in the end ones journey is between them and God. God will not force anything upon a man unless they are ready for it. It's like with those who leave the Church. They simply don't understand it, and lose what understanding they did have. God's not going to force them to understand the truth. Hence, they leave and accept what they can understand.

Anyway, all God requires is Faith and Humility..... We keep having that every single day, and he will reveal ALL to our minds. It's a wonderful thing.

 

[he-man]

Beginning with Adam onwards it is obvious that man was created to worship the Creator. Nowhere does it indicate man should aspire to become a "god".

In fact to aspire to become "like God" was the basis for the original sin in the Garden of Eden.

How about kings and priests,
10 and didst make us to our God kings and priests, and we shall reign upon the earth.'
Rev 5:10 (YLT)

 

[The Gregorian]

Both are, of course, wrong on their Biblical views, as evidenced by both having to write their own 'Bible.' Cordially, Skip.

The book of mormon isn't a translation of the 66 books of the bible... it's an entirely different book. The JWs used the KJV up until about 1960, when they worked on a modern translation because the KJV isn't the easiest to read. Within a few years later, MANY other modern translations came into being, such as the new KJV, and NIV, among quite a few others. The NWT translation is in no way a "new book" ... it's simply a modern translation... just like every other translation that doesn't use "thee"s and "thou"s.

JWs are fine with using any translation, however, we find ours to be the most accurate as the name of God has been mostly/completely excluded from some translations. (By the way, we also get the name "Jehovah" directly out of the KJV, where it appears 4 times as the transliteration of "YHWH")

 

[Albion]

The NWT translation is in no way a "new book" ... it's simply a modern translation... just like every other translation that doesn't use "thee"s and "thou"s.

The NWT alters some of the wording in order to have the text seem to support the doctrines of the JW organization. The thees and thous are not the issue at all.

 

[Albion]

If what we are saying is true, then God would give man some way of proving it to themselves that it is true.

We call that " the Bible."

We teach that the Holy Ghost is the revealer of all truth

We teach, with Scripture, that the Holy Ghost keeps us in the truth and cannot ever contradict the word of God. He doesn't impart doctrine, etc. that had been previously unknown.

He promises to tell us through the Holy Ghost personally to our souls

Where does he do that?

 

[Skip Sampson]

The book of mormon isn't a translation of the 66 books of the bible... it's an entirely different book.

Yes, and no. It contains about 25,000 words from the KJV, uncited. They were copied directly by Joseph Smith, who even copied some of the errors in the KJV at that time. The rest of the book reflects the unfettered imagination of Smith, and it really shows its human source.

The JWs used the KJV up until about 1960, when they worked on a modern translation because the KJV isn't the easiest to read. ... The NWT translation is in no way a "new book" ... it's simply a modern translation... just like every other translation that doesn't use "thee"s and "thou"s.

It's a bit more complicated than that. It's not a translation as others, such as the NIV, are. It's a version that is altered to comply with the JW doctrine. As an exercise, find out the qualifications of the men who came up with the NWT, especially their qualifications in Hebrew and Greek. Let us know what you find. Cordially, Skip.

 

[The Gregorian]

It's a bit more complicated than that. It's not a translation as others, such as the NIV, are. It's a version that is altered to comply with the JW doctrine. As an exercise, find out the qualifications of the men who came up with the NWT, especially their qualifications in Hebrew and Greek. Let us know what you find. Cordially, Skip.

As an attempt at humility, the translators weren't cited. They aren't important, what's important is the message, which a person can easily check for themselves by checking into an interlinear translation and looking at the hebrew/greek for themselves.

For example: Luke 23:46, the king james does exactly what you're claiming of the NWT. They translate "kai tauta eipon exepneusen" as "he gave up the ghost" in an attempt to change the simple greek message to support a concept of Jesus not actually dying.

Literally, after saying that he put his very soul in the hands of his father (commonly translated as "Father, into your hands, I commit my spirit), this means "And saying these things, he expired" ... the greek has no indication of him handing his out-of-body ghost upward... but that his very spirit died with his body.

This mistranslation is likely due to the clarification in Matthew 27:50, where it states: "ho de iesous palin kraxas phone megale apheken to pneuma," commonly translated as "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost" ... when in fact it directly translates to "and upon crying loudly again, Jesus forfeited his soul"


... Just because there's a difference between the NWT and other translations doesn't mean the NWT is the alteration. There are quite a few very significant mistranslations in the KJV, which were copied into most other versions on the sole basis that the KJV is orthodox, whether it's accurate or not.

As with any translation, there are a few things I think could be better worded than the NWT puts it... but it's certainly less offensively wrong than the KJV and NIV.

 

[The Gregorian]

For an even more striking example of common orthodox mistranslations... Look at the KJV or NIV version of Jeremiah 16:21...

Therefore, behold, I will
this once cause them to
know, I will cause them to
know mine hand and my
might; and they shall know
that my name [is] The
LORD.

Check out the interlinear with your own eyes:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/jer16.pdf

Notice how God himself speaking that by his hand and his might, we shall know that his name is (something altered by the KJV/NIV).

How people have the courage to delete God's name in order to confuse him with his Son when God himself speaks of his will that people should know his individual name.... it amazes me.

 

[Albion]

As an attempt at humility, the translators weren't cited. They aren't important, what's important is the message, which a person can easily check for themselves by checking into an interlinear translation and looking at the hebrew/greek for themselves.

For example: Luke 23:46, the king james does exactly what you're claiming of the NWT. They translate "kai tauta eipon exepneusen" as "he gave up the ghost" in an attempt to change the simple greek message to support a concept of Jesus not actually dying.

Literally, after saying that he put his very soul in the hands of his father (commonly translated as "Father, into your hands, I commit my spirit), this means "And saying these things, he expired" ... the greek has no indication of him handing his out-of-body ghost upward... but that his very spirit died with his body.

This mistranslation is likely due to the clarification in Matthew 27:50, where it states: "ho de iesous palin kraxas phone megale apheken to pneuma," commonly translated as "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost" ... when in fact it directly translates to "and upon crying loudly again, Jesus forfeited his soul"


... Just because there's a difference between the NWT and other translations doesn't mean the NWT is the alteration. There are quite a few very significant mistranslations in the KJV, which were copied into most other versions on the sole basis that the KJV is orthodox, whether it's accurate or not.

As with any translation, there are a few things I think could be better worded than the NWT puts it... but it's certainly less offensively wrong than the KJV and NIV.

The translators of the KJV were the best Bible scholars available, educated in the ancient languages, and worked from the original sources. It has stood the test of time and is basically the same in meaning as the best known translations of more recent days, even though the teams of scholars from many different churches who worked on these went back to the originals and did not simply modernize the wording used in the KJV.

The NWT is the work of a group of unknown parties headquartered in Brooklyn, New York who are all of the same denomination. Considering that no other translation accords with the changes made by the producers of the NWT, it's not likely that the NWT has a corner on the truth.

 

[Albion]

How people have the courage to delete God's name in order to confuse him with his Son when God himself speaks of his will that people should know his individual name.... it amazes me.

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of the meaning of "name." After all, when I say, "Stop in the name of the law" I'm not referring to John or Smith or to anyone's first or last "name."

 

[he-man]

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of the meaning of "name." After all, when I say, "Stop in the name of the law" I'm not referring to John or Smith or to anyone's first or last "name."

לכן הנני מודיעם בפעם הזאת אודיעם את-ידי ואת-גבורתי וידעו כי-שמי יהוה
H3068 יהוה
yehôvâh From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah

20 Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods?

21 Therefore here I am to make known this time to tell you by the hand of mightiness to know that the name is (the) self Existent [Jehovah]

Jer 16:21 Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might;
and they shall know that my name is The LORD.

Hey! Christ had only ONE nature until he was resurrected!

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

(4) to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you,

(5) who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

(6) In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials,

Heb 1:4 Having become so much superior to the angels, as he has by inheritance a more diverse1 name than they.

5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, You are my Son, this day have I created2 thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Php 2:6 Who, being in the figure1 of God, thought it not grasping2 to lead3 to be similar4 to God:

7 But himself, he was completely lacking5, and clinged6 to the figure of a slave, and became in likeness of men:

8 And he having been found in the form as a man, he humbled himself, and became subject1 up to death, and the death of the stake.

Gal 3:20 ο δε μεσιτης ενος ουκ εστιν ο δε θεος εις εστιν
Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not one, but God is one.

Mar 12:29 απεκριθη ο ιησους οτι πρωτη εστιν ακουε ισραηλ κυριος ο θεος ημων κυριος εις εστιν
Mr 12:29 Jesus answered, The first to be is, Hear, 0 Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

Mr 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Teacher, well, you have spoken, in truth: That there is One; and there is not another except Him:

Ge 4:26 ולשת גם-הוא ילד-בן ויקרא את-שמו אנוש אז הוחל לקרא בשם יהוה
Ge 4:26 And to Seth, to him was born a son; and he called his name Enos: thus humans started to call upon the name of Jehovah.

Psa 116:13 כוס-ישועות אשא ובשם יהוה אקרא
Psa 116:13 I will lift up the cup of salvation, and call on the name of Jehovah.

Rom 1:7 πασιν τοις ουσιν εν ρωμη αγαπητοις θεου κλητοις αγιοις χαρις υμιν και ειρηνη απο θεου πατρος ημων και κυριου ιησου χριστου
Rom 1:7 to all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called saints; Grace to you, and peace, from God the Father of us, and the Lord Jesus Christ!

1Co 1:2 τη εκκλησια του θεου τη ουση εν κορινθω ηγιασμενοις εν χριστω ιησου κλητοις αγιοις συν πασιν τοις επικαλουμενοις το ονομα του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου εν παντι τοπω αυτων και ημων
1Co 1:2 Unto the congregation of God which being at Corinth, to them that are set apart in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that invoke the name of Jesus Christ, in every location, our Lord and theirs

 

[Albion]

Don't know how that deals with what I wrote, he-man, but we all know that God the Father has a name or names. That isn't the issue, you know.

 

[timbo3]

In the field of politics, there is the difference as between day and night for Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. Mormons are known to deeply delve into the political arena.

For example, on the web page, Famous Mormons in Politics, it says that "Ronald Reagan truly admired the Latter-day Saints. His administration included more members of the Church than any other American president, ever. Three of us, David Fischer, Gregory Newell and I, served on his personal White House staff. Richard Wirthlin was his chief strategist. Ted Bell served as Secretary of Education, Angela Buchanan was Treasurer, Rex Lee was Solicitor General. His White House included Roger Porter, Brent Scowcroft, Richard Beal, Blake Parish, Jon Huntsman Jr., Dodie Borup and Rocky Kuonen, and there were many other Latter-day Saints throughout his Administration. President Thomas S. Monson served on a Presidential Commission on Volunteerism. Others were ambassadors. LDS senators and representatives were held in special regard, and the Tabernacle Choir was his special inaugural guest." -Stephen M. Studdert, Special Assistant to President Reagan.

This is only a few Mormons who have involved themselves in the political field. Yet, Jesus told his eleven faithful apostles: "These things I command you, that you love one another...If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is it s own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, on this account the world hates you."(John 15:17, 19)

In addition, James, who was Jesus half brother, wrote: "Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God."(James 4:4)

History identifies that the early Christians did not become involved in the world and its affairs. Edward Gibbon, in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, said: "While they [the Christians] inculcated the maxims of passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . It was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes."(Vol. I, p. 416)

Prior to and during World War II, when faced with reports of violence toward Jews in Nazi Germany, “the Mormon Church did almost nothing,” said The Salt Lake Tribune some fifteen years ago. Some Mormons, along with members of other churches, “were entranced by Hitler and his message of racial purity, and there were those who thought they were obeying their church’s teaching to honor state leaders.”

During the Holocaust the German sector of the Mormons “did what most of the churches did; the leaders went along,” said Professor Franklin Littell of Temple University, Philadelphia. At that time, Douglas Tobler, professor of history at Brigham Young University, wanted to examine “the church’s failure to take an institutional stand against Nazism,” the paper said.

Interestingly, the Tribune observed that historian John S. Conway, of the University of British Columbia, Canada, said that the only religious organization that absolutely refused to follow the Nazis was Jehovah’s Witnesses. He added that for this more than half were sent to concentration camps.

Because the nation of Israel had become immersed in the "world", murdering Jehovah's prophets and those sent to her (Matt 23:33-35; 1 Thess 2:14, 15), Jesus said to the religious leaders: "This is why I say to you, The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits."(Matt 21:43)

The nation of natural Israel lost its privilege of being "the Kingdom of God", being replaced with "a nation producing its fruits". Those "fruits" include being "no part of the world", and of which Mormons have not done. On the other hand, Jehovah's Witnesses have done as Jesus commanded, being "no part of the world" and its entourage.

 

[Albion]

In the field of politics, there is the difference as between day and night for Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. Mormons are known to deeply delve into the political arena.

For example, on the web page, Famous Mormons in Politics, it says that "Ronald Reagan truly admired the Latter-day Saints. His administration included more members of the Church than any other American president, ever. Three of us, David Fischer, Gregory Newell and I, served on his personal White House staff. Richard Wirthlin was his chief strategist. Ted Bell served as Secretary of Education, Angela Buchanan was Treasurer, Rex Lee was Solicitor General. His White House included Roger Porter, Brent Scowcroft, Richard Beal, Blake Parish, Jon Huntsman Jr., Dodie Borup and Rocky Kuonen, and there were many other Latter-day Saints throughout his Administration. President Thomas S. Monson served on a Presidential Commission on Volunteerism. Others were ambassadors. LDS senators and representatives were held in special regard, and the Tabernacle Choir was his special inaugural guest." -Stephen M. Studdert, Special Assistant to President Reagan.

This is only a few Mormons who have involved themselves in the political field. Yet, Jesus told his eleven faithful apostles: "These things I command you, that you love one another...If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is it s own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, on this account the world hates you."(John 15:17, 19)

In addition, James, who was Jesus half brother, wrote: "Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God."(James 4:4)

History identifies that the early Christians did not become involved in the world and its affairs. Edward Gibbon, in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, said: "While they [the Christians] inculcated the maxims of passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . It was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes."(Vol. I, p. 416)

Prior to and during World War II, when faced with reports of violence toward Jews in Nazi Germany, “the Mormon Church did almost nothing,” said The Salt Lake Tribune some fifteen years ago. Some Mormons, along with members of other churches, “were entranced by Hitler and his message of racial purity, and there were those who thought they were obeying their church’s teaching to honor state leaders.”

During the Holocaust the German sector of the Mormons “did what most of the churches did; the leaders went along,” said Professor Franklin Littell of Temple University, Philadelphia. At that time, Douglas Tobler, professor of history at Brigham Young University, wanted to examine “the church’s failure to take an institutional stand against Nazism,” the paper said.

Interestingly, the Tribune observed that historian John S. Conway, of the University of British Columbia, Canada, said that the only religious organization that absolutely refused to follow the Nazis was Jehovah’s Witnesses. He added that for this more than half were sent to concentration camps.

Because the nation of Israel had become immersed in the "world", murdering Jehovah's prophets and those sent to her (Matt 23:33-35; 1 Thess 2:14, 15), Jesus said to the religious leaders: "This is why I say to you, The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits."(Matt 21:43)

The nation of natural Israel lost its privilege of being "the Kingdom of God", being replaced with "a nation producing its fruits". Those "fruits" include being "no part of the world", and of which Mormons have not done. On the other hand, Jehovah's Witnesses have done as Jesus commanded, being "no part of the world" and its entourage.

Maybe the Amish are the true believers instead, since they are even less a part of the world than the JWs.

 

[ldsfaqs]

Ya, that's a serious misinterpretation of scripture.
The Bible teaches the Christian to "be a PART of the World, but NOT OF IT...."

That is the actual doctrine.

 

[timbo3]

Ya, that's a serious misinterpretation of scripture.
The Bible teaches the Christian to "be a PART of the World, but NOT OF IT...."

That is the actual doctrine.

Jesus said in prayer to his Father, just hours before he died: "I have given your word to them, but the world has hated them, because they are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world. I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one. They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world."(John 17:14-16) You supplied no scripture where it said for a Christian is to "be a PART of the world, but NOT OF IT".

History abounds with evidence that the early Christians avoided any involvement in the political affairs of the nations. When certain Jews wanted to make Jesus king after his miraculous feeding of five thousand men, not counting women and children, how did Jesus respond ?

John 6:15 says: "Therefore Jesus, knowing they were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew again into the mountain all alone." Following in Jesus "footsteps"(1 Pet 2:21), none of the apostles were entangled with the Roman political arena.

In fact, concerning a Christian becoming a soldier, E. W. Barnes noted: "A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service."(The Rise of Christianity, 1947, p. 333)

In The Great Events by Famous Historians, it said that "the Christians . . . shrank from public office and military service."(“Persecution of the Christians in Gaul, A.D. 177,” by F. P. G. Guizot) It was after the death of the apostles that changes began to take place, with the foretold apostasy starting that Jesus had illustrated at Matthew 13:24-30 (with Jesus explanation at verses 36-43) and of the apostle Paul at 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12.

 

[ldsfaqs]

Notice the word "as" in the scriptures it says "as" one of us not one of us or become like us. There where "as" one of them because of the knowledge of good and evil not because they where then gods or became or will become gods.

Of course "as".... We are mortals, not yet saved and exalted as the Father.
Further, that's actually what satan also said. Even further, there isn't that "distinction" in the actual Hebrew. Even further, as is as.... If I'm as my father, obviously I'm not exactly the same, but I'm the same enough of the important stuff.

Further, Christ's own words in John 10 and the Law in Psalms 82? is clear.

 

[he-man]

Jesus said in prayer to his Father, just hours before he died: "I have given your word to them, but the world has hated them, because they are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world. I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one. They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world."(John 17:14-16) You supplied no scripture where it said for a Christian is to "be a PART of the world, but NOT OF IT".

History abounds with evidence that the early Christians avoided any involvement in the political affairs of the nations. When certain Jews wanted to make Jesus king after his miraculous feeding of five thousand men, not counting women and children, how did Jesus respond ?

John 6:15 says: "Therefore Jesus, knowing they were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew again into the mountain all alone." Following in Jesus "footsteps"(1 Pet 2:21), none of the apostles were entangled with the Roman political arena.

In fact, concerning a Christian becoming a soldier, E. W. Barnes noted: "A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service."(The Rise of Christianity, 1947, p. 333)

In The Great Events by Famous Historians, it said that "the Christians . . . shrank from public office and military service."(“Persecution of the Christians in Gaul, A.D. 177,” by F. P. G. Guizot) It was after the death of the apostles that changes began to take place, with the foretold apostasy starting that Jesus had illustrated at Matthew 13:24-30 (with Jesus explanation at verses 36-43) and of the apostle Paul at 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12.

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in him.

 

[2ducklow]

Joke on Mormonism - Funny - Video