LDS Mountain Meadows Massacre: John D. Lee was a Scapegoat!

He is the way said:

Clement of Alexandria was a theologian not a prophet of God. He never claimed to be a prophet and therefore was giving his opinion. That being said there are Christian churches that practice baptism for the dead:

"Other Christian churches
As part of their sacraments, the New Apostolic Church and the Old Apostolic Church also practice baptism for the dead, as well as Communion and Sealing to the Departed. In this practice a proxy or substitute is baptised in the place of an unknown number of deceased persons. According to NAC and OAC doctrine the deceased do not enter the body of the substitute."

From: Baptism for the dead - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

Does a Mormon prophet know more than a studied theologian from that time? If so, let us take a closer look at statements from Mormon prophets, and see how much they contradict scientific and theological statements, and which of them later proved to be true. Are you ready for this? I have enough evidence to do so. Just one example:

For many years after Joseph Smith's death the Mormons continued to teach that the moon was inhabited. On July 24, 1870, Brigham Young, the second president of the Mormon church, stated: "Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon?... when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to
them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to the inhabitants of the sun.
Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain" (Journal of Discourses, vol.13, p.271).
As late as 1892 the teaching that the moon was inhabited appeared in a church publication. In an article published in the Young Woman's Journal, O. B. Huntington stated:
Nearly all the great discoveries of men in the last half century have, in one way or another, either directly or indirectly, contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a Prophet.
As far back as 1837, I know that he said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we do, that they live generally to near the age of a 1000 years.
He described the men as averaging near six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style. In my Patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph the Prophet, in Kirtland, 1837, I was told that I should preach the gospel before I was 21 years of age; that I should preach the gospel to the inhabitants upon the islands of the sea, and—to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you
can now behold with your eyes (The Young Woman's Journal, published by the Young Ladies' Mutual Improvement Associations of Zion, 1892, vol.3, pp.263-64). Source: J. & S. Tanner, The changing world of Mormonism, p. 25

What would scientists say? What is the present Mormon prophet?
And what would Christians say if I can claim and prove it; that Mormons has long believed that God and Jesus are polygamists?

He is the way said:

The Bible states that baptism is a necessary ordinance.

Click to expand...

For the LIVING, not for the dead! Heaven, how can one be so ignorant?

He is the way said:

Baptism for the dead was done in the temple. The temple was destroyed in 70 CE. That ended baptism for the dead until it was restored.

Click to expand...

Wrong, my dear! There were NO baptisms for the dead in the Jewish temple! Only Mormons baptize the dead in their temples. Does anyone here know how this happens? From my manuscript, translated for you:

The "baptism of the dead" is closely linked to Mormons' idea of their "plan of salvation," and culminates in the idea that EVERYONE must hear and accept the (mormon) gospel, including collecting genealogical data. Data of people who have died and for living Mormon relatives or non-related Mormons to do the work (baptism, endowment, sealing).
Young people who go to temple weeks, or Mormons who are in the temple for their deceased relatives, as well as others, perform this "act."
To do this, they climb into a room in the basement, where there is a basin supported by 12 oxen, which is supposed to symbolize the 12 tribes of Israel. In more modern temples, however, only 6 oxen are made into 12 oxen using mirrors, a trick to save money.
The Baptist and the baptist enter, both dressed in white, the Baptist raises up his right hand, which the baptist holds on to his left outstretched forearm, and says,
"Brother/sister...., in power of attorney I baptize you for and instead of... who is dead. In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.. (Source Rüdiger Hauth, "Temple Cult and Baptism of the Dead- The Secret Rituals of the Mormons", p.48)
Subsequently, the deceased person, represented by a living person, is confirmed, i.e. the (mormon) Holy Spirit/Ghost is donated to him or her. And, if he is a man, he will also be given the Melchizedek Priesthood of the Mormons.

If there is interest, I could also write about the endowment (pre-regulations, garment, and endowment) and record the connection between Mormons and Freemasons. What is interesting about the endowment is that originally on stage or screen in earlier versions a clergyman appeared as the servant of the devil, who later disappeared.

He is the way said:

There is this:

(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 15:29)

29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Click to expand...

Did Paul speak of the deaths of the second Jewish temple there? Did he even speak of Christian doctrine? Or did he not speak of some Gnostic groups who practiced death-heepering without believing in the Christian Resurrection?
Whoever reads the whole letter to the Corinthians knows it! Those who only pick something without understanding the connection did not understand Paul! And Jesus too!

LindaBerlin said:

According to Joseph "always horny" Smith, the writing on the gold plates was a "reformed Egyptian". Only, at the time when the Book of Mormon is set (about 600 BC to 430 A.D.), there was no Reformed Egyptian.
Your so-called "prophet" is once again convicted as a liar and deceiver, because according to Kurt Sethe, a scientist, the ersher reform of the Egyptian language did not arise until the 1st century BC. More about the Reformed Egyptian of him in his article published in German:

https://www.coptica.ch/Sethe_Reform.pdf

Click to expand...

What did Kurt Sethe know about the ancient Americas? He was born and lived in Germany.

LindaBerlin said:

Have you ever read the whole chapter? And the chapters before that? If so, you didn't understand. If not, please read it.
For me, so much ignorance of the facts is hard to bear. And amusing how you try to get out.

Click to expand...

I have read it and I do understand it. It is obvious that John the Baptist had a far different calling than Paul did. Jesus also had a far different calling than they did. You are looking for a way to prove something that you can't prove. Paul verified the ordinance of baptism for the dead.

LindaBerlin said:

On the subject of baptism of the dead (translated from a German website):

This baptism takes place - depending on the translation of the preposition "hyper" - over the dead, i.e. over their graves, or for the dead, i.e. in the sense of a deputy baptism. A baptism above the tombs might have the purpose of strengthening the belief in resurrection. However, it could be done in a body of water, as is customary according to the NT (see Mark 1,9-11 par.; Acts 8,24-26 and others). In addition, the preposition "hyper" in the NT usually does not have the local meaning "over". It is therefore more likely that there is talk of a vicarious baptism with the aim of imparting salvation. However, the question arises as to why he refers to such a strange custom. An answer can be found by making clear the essential difference between ordinary baptism and vicarious baptism. Ordinary baptism, in Paul's opinion, conveys salvation to the living beyond death. In concrete terms, it causes the revival of the dead. The baptism of a dead person through the baptism of a deputy conveys salvation exclusively to a dead person. If one adheres to the words of Paul, salvation can be determined as an enabler to awaken. The raising is what Paul matters; therefore he cannot refer to ordinary baptisms, because the resurrection deniers could then again refer to the healing effects of baptism with regard to the present life and deny the resurrection.
Source: 1 Kor 15,29-34 - Erster Korintherbrief - Der erste Brief des Paulus an die Korinther - Auslegung und Bibliographie zur Bibel

Click to expand...

I agree that that was strange because that is NOT the proper way baptism for the dead is done.

LindaBerlin said:

For the LIVING, not for the dead! Heaven, how can one be so ignorant?

Click to expand...

If believe baptism is a necessary ordinance for one to be saved.

If this is true, then how does one get taught the gospel of Jesus Christ, and baptized, who lived in Russia in 1567 and died, never hearing the name of Jesus Christ?

LindaBerlin said:

Hereby I give you the first l*** prize for ignorance and do not want to know.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but this kind of language is not needed in a discussion of the differences we have in the doctrines of Christ.

LindaBerlin said:

Does a Mormon prophet know more than a studied theologian from that time?

Click to expand...

Who would you rather listen to:
1) a person that had studied about God his entire life.

OR

2) a person who talked face to face with God for 5 minutes.

Prophets of God do not speak for God every time they open their mouths. They can and do have their own thoughts on matters that are not important enough for God to give them revelation.

I believe, people on the moon and sun were scientific interests in the 1800's. I believe there were many "scientists" that believed there were men on the sun and moon.

Besides, how do you 100% scientifically know that there are not people that live on the moon or the sun? Yes, we landed on the moon, and no people were seen, but that doesn't scientifically shut the door to the probability that there are. Am I right or wrong?

LindaBerlin said:

For the LIVING, not for the dead! Heaven, how can one be so ignorant?

Click to expand...

We believe the "dead", who have passed on, have spirits that left their bodies and are still "living" in a spirit world. We believe each of us have an eternal spirit that cannot die. Therefore, even though we are doing work for a person that has passed on, to us that person is still "living". If you look at it this way, it is not a matter of ignorance, but a difference of opinion.

I could call you ignorant for the things you are unaware of also, but I won't because that will not get us closer to helping each other understand our differences.