"...And Your Lord is Never Forgetful..." II

[Niblo]

According to investigators doing the investigation,

So far, there was an unusual noise reorded on the blackbox,

as of yet unclear what,

also the spreading of the wreckage indicates an inflight incident,

What? is what they are investigating.

All else is pure speculation,
and that does not help the grieving in any way whatsoever.

As for western medie, well what is there to say.

The Malasyan flight that was brought down over Ukraine,

Big headlines,
"Putin killed my son"

I have a limited Word store so the only Word I can find is,

INSANE

Yes, I was jumping to conclusions. Sorry about that.

 

[Jane_Doe]

By the way, why do you wonder why Muslims don't "get their religion in order" but you don't question or wonder why Mormons don't get THEIR religion in order? You still have polygamist Mormons who abuse women and children in every way - physically, sexually, emotionally.

You realize that no members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the mainstream Mormon church) are polygamous (present tense)? Men like Warren Jeffs are not part of the LDS church.

If a LDS man (or woman) were to marry more than one spouse or abuses a child, they are immediately excommunicated from the church and will be legally persecuted to the full extent of the law.

 

[smaneck]

Right, which is why I never said that it was "identical". Thanks for stating the obvious, though.

I'm still waiting for your evidence of this statement:

"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

 

[smaneck]

Has it been confirmed it was a bomb that caused downing of the Russian plane?

Not sure, but ISIS claimed responsibility for it and the Russians are taking them at their word.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

You realize that no members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the mainstream Mormon church) are polygamous (present tense)? Men like Warren Jeffs are not part of the LDS church.

Yes, I realize that. I also realize that it is a current development and that the mainstream church approves of the polygamy which was widespread and which their earlier prophets and members engaged in, including people such as Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Mitt Romney's great-grandfather. So it's not that the mainstream LDS Church is against polygamy per se, they are just against it for today. That could change in an instant with another "revelation" from their prophet.

As for Warren Jeffs and those like him, while they are not part of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" they are still part of the same religion, i.e. Mormonism or "LDS". By practicing polygamy, they are living more closely to the lifestyles of the founders of Mormonism than the mainstream church members are. So, Warren Jeffs are part of one of the LDS Churches - there is no one LDS Church.

I'll note also that Joseph Smith's wife, Emma, and his kids by Emma, hated polygamy so much that they went off and formed the RLDS; or as they would tell it, they continued the True LDS Church while Brigham Young and the polygamists split off from them.

If a LDS man (or woman) were to marry more than one spouse or abuses a child, they are immediately excommunicated from the church and will be legally persecuted to the full extent of the law.

But they wouldn't posthumously excommunicate anyone for polygamy, such as Brigham Young - in fact, they celebrate the polygamists of their history by naming their most treasured and honored institutions after them. Not quite an indictment of polygamy - in fact, more of an endorsement of polygamy.

 

[smaneck]

Yes, I realize that. I also realize that it is a current development and that the mainstream church approves of the polygamy which was widespread and which their earlier prophets and members engaged in, including people such as Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Mitt Romney's great-grandfather. So it's not that the mainstream LDS Church is against polygamy per se, they are just against it for today. That could change in an instant with another "revelation" from their prophet.

I'm still waiting for your evidence of this statement:

"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

Where and when did Joseph Smith say he was another Muhammad. And where precisely does he call "mormonism' the new Islam?

Or were you just slandering him?

 

[Jane_Doe]

Yes, I realize that.

Ok. Then please don't go around bearing false witness by telling people that Mormons are polygamous, or that Warren Jeffs is LDS.

As for Warren Jeffs and those like him, while they are not part of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" they are still part of the same religion, i.e. Mormonism or "LDS".... So, Warren Jeffs are part of one of the LDS Churches - there is no one LDS Church.

Again, not true.

The acronym "LDS" is shorthand for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This is one specific church, with one specific set of doctrinesncluding no polygamy).

Warren Jeffs leads a fundamentalist sect that broke away from the LDS church over 100 years ago, the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or FLDS.

While both groups trace their origins back to Joseph Smith, they are now VERY divergent doctrines and culture. Similar to how the Westboro Baptist Church is very different from the Southern Baptist Church. It is a gross mistake to assume over-generalize beliefs or people across different churches.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Ok. Then please don't go around bearing false witness by telling people that Mormons are polygamous, or that Warren Jeffs is LDS.

I'm not bearing false witness at all. Mormons ARE polygamous, these days it's to varying degrees. Some mormons are openly and actively polygamous, while some (like those in the main LDS sect) only accept polygamy for certain time periods in history, such as when their prophet Brigham Young practiced it. In fact, they honor him, including his polygamy, because they believe he was RIGHT to be polygamous, so this proves that they are polygamous to at least the point of accepting it under their religion in certain circumstances.

Again, not true.

The acronym "LDS" is shorthand for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This is one specific church, with one specific set of doctrinesncluding no polygamy).

Wrong. "LDS" stands for "Latter Day Saints" (or "Latter-day Saints"). It refers to the religions of the Latter Day Saint movement, which is the Mormon religion. The "CoJCoLDS" is one of several LDS sects/denominations. It is the biggest one, but still just one of many.

Warren Jeffs leads a fundamentalist sect that broke away from the LDS church over 100 years ago, the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or FLDS.

Right, Fundamentalist LDS. He and his group are LDS. They are Mormons. If you're admitting it here, why did you deny it earlier?

While both groups trace their origins back to Joseph Smith, they are now VERY divergent doctrines and culture.

Aside from polygamy and who the "prophet" is they are not very divergent; they accept the same scriptures and have the same basic religious beliefs and practices as each other. Besides, they are not the only other LDS sect. There are others, like the Community of Christ (the RLDS) who are similar to the Salt Lake sect. They are also LDS. There are several other LDS sects as well.

Similar to how the Westboro Baptist Church is very different from the Southern Baptist Church. It is a gross mistake to assume over-generalize beliefs or people across different churches.

That's a bad example because Westboro Baptist Church is a Church, not a sect. In their case they are likely misapplying the name "Baptist" because their actions contradict the majority of Baptist sects. Warren Jeffs' sect is similar to other Mormon sects, including the main one, with the glaring difference being the continued practice of polygamy. And again, even there the FLDS are not that different from the main Salt Lake City LDS denomination because even the main denomination accepts polygamy in the big picture, they simply don't accept it today.

 

[smaneck]

I'm not bearing false witness at all.

Then you can show us where "Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam." If you can't then you did bear false witness. You've only been asked to do this five times now.

 

[Jane_Doe]

ArmenianJohn, I am LDS. I know what I'm talking about here, and I'm just trying to help you get your facts straight.

If you want to say: "LDS were polygamous at one point", that is a correct statement. But to say "LDS are polygamous" (present tense) is incorrect.

The acronym "LDS" refers specifically to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The people I know in the CoC church don't like to be called "LDS" or "Mormon", but rather "Community of Christ" (hence the church name). They don't want to be called "LDS" because they disagree with the doctrine's of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Likewise, I doubt that members of the FLDS group would want to be called "LDS" (though admittedly I don't know any FLDS members personally).

That's a bad example because Westboro Baptist Church is a Church, not a sect. In their case they are likely misapplying the name "Baptist" because their actions contradict the majority of Baptist sects.

I find the Baptist example to be quite fitting: two different churches, which share some history and part of the name, but have very different doctrines. Likewise, the LDS, FLDS, and RLDS all share some history and part of a name, but have very different doctrines.

Aside from polygamy and who the "prophet" is they are not very divergent; they accept the same scriptures and have the same basic religious beliefs and practices as each other.

There are actually many difference between LDS, FLDS, and RLDS-- they are in no way the same church. For example, they all have different texts they consider to be scriptures. Warren Jeffs' FLDS are polygamous and live in isolated compounds, shunning technology. Obviously, Utah-based LDS do not shun technology (else we won't be having this conversation). Utah-based LDS have a great theological interest in family history, which is not shared by RLDS or FLDS. RLDS (or Community of Christ, which they are now called), are theologically very liberal, embracing women and gay clergy, unlike Utah-LDS or FLDS. And these are just a few examples of the difference between these divergent churches.

-- (Edited for poor-English and clarity)

 

[ArmenianJohn]

ArmenianJohn, I am LDS. I know what I'm talking about here, I'm trying to help you get your facts straight.

I have my facts straight Jane_Doe. Your being LDS doesn't mean you're right about everything; it's possible for an LDS person to be wrong and in fact it's very common.

If you want to say: "LDS were polygamous at one point", then that is correct. To say "LDS are polygamous" is incorrect.

Well of course that's correct, but what I said is also correct. Not only were LDS polygamous at one point but most of them still are today. Some actively practice it, like the FLDS. The main Salt Lake City sect does not practice it today but they honor the past practice of polygamy as being from their god. This is why they hold in high honor their past polygamist leaders like Brigham Young.

If you're trying to convince me that an FLDS person or RLDS/CoC person wants to be referred to as "Mormon" or "LDS", that's a good laugh. I have friends whom are CoC and they refuse to be known as "Mormon" or "LDS" because they don't want to be mixed up with the Salt Lake based group (which they have major theological disagreements).

I never talked about what those people "want to be refferred to as". Whatever they want to be referred to as, they are Mormons and they are LDS. They come from the LDS movement and they use the main Mormon scriptures. I can understand why they'd want to dissociate from the moniker "LDS" in some cases but that doesn't mean they're not LDS.

The FLDS likewise have major theological disagreements with the CoC and the Salt Lake group, and don't want to be known as either.

Well they do refer to themselves as "saints", for one thing. So they do acknowledge themselves as "LDS". They probably avoid it because of persecution they receive from the Salt Lake sect. But whatever they want to be called and whatever theological disagreements, the basics are that they are LDS/Mormon.

Let's start with some obvious differences:

* CoJCoLDS, RLDS/CoC, and FLDS all have different scriptures and interpretation of common passages.
* RLDS/CoC ordains women and practicing homosexuals to the priesthood. They are Trinitarian. CoJCoLDS, and FLDS are not.
* FLDS live in polygamous compounds dressed in 1800's outfits, while they broader society and technology. CoJCoLDS and RLDS/CoC. (Obvious example of me being online right now).
* CoJCoLDS engage very activity in missionary work, family history, and have a highly correlated international presence (down to everyone having the same Sunday school lesson each week). FLDS and RLDS/CoC do not.

These are not big enough differences to make any group non-LDS or non-Mormon. They all believe in Joseph Smith, they all believe in the Book of Mormon (and the D&C). They all believe in restorationism and "latter day saints" and believe that they are. They all believe in a prophet and continued revelation.

The one of this group that could possibly have changed enough to no longer be LDS/Mormon is the CoC/RLDS, because they are the only ones who never practiced polygamy, and they have adopted many Christian beliefs to replace many Mormon beliefs. Still, they believe in the Book of Mormon, which makes them Mormons.

I think it's a great example: different groups of people, whom interrupt scripture differently than each other, and hold different traditions than each other.

Westboro and Southern Baptist both share the name "Baptist", some common history, and identical scriptures. But they are very different in beliefs and practices, which contradict each other. Likewise CoJCoLDS, RLDS/CoC, and FLDS share some common history, and sort of similar scriptures (there are major differences). But like the Baptist example, they are very different in beliefs and practices, which contradict each other.

No, it's a bad example. That would be like comparing one LDS "Ward" to another LDS sect. It would be like comparing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangite), which is a sect, to the Jordan, Utah Ward of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The problem with your attempt to make an analogy is that you are comparing things that aren't analogous. Westboro Baptist Church is Baptist. It is an independent Baptist Church. Unlike the LDS/mormon religion, in the Baptist sect there can be independent Baptist Churches.

A better analogy would be simply to compare 2 different Christian Denominations. For example, Southern Baptists and Presbyterians. While they have many differences and many interpretations of scripture, they are both still "Christian" because they hold to the basic Christian essentials.

Same with Mormonism. No matter how different FLDS and the Salt Lake sect are, they are both still "LDS" or "Mormon" because of certain basics they have in common.

 

[Jane_Doe]

ArmenianJohn,

While you were replying to my response, I was actually editing my response to be a bit more clear (my previous English was sub-par). I apologize if this causes any confusion.

I'm not really sure why you, as an OO, care so much about how different Joseph-Smith-orginating churches view themselves and each other. I think your view to be factually incorrect, over-generalizing, and very much of the I'm-going-to-inform-you-of-what-you-believe attitude. But if you're completely set on it, I'll just leave you be (I'm not interested in pointless arguments).

 

[ArmenianJohn]

ArmenianJohn,

While you were replying to my response, I was actually editing my response to be a bit more clear (my previous English was sub-par). I apologize if this causes any confusion.

Thank you Jane_Doe. Honestly, I didn't find your English to be sub-par in your unedited response. Also, your edited response doesn't shed any new light - it seems to restate your opinions.

I'm not really sure why you, as an OO, care so much about how different Joseph-Smith-orginating churches view themselves and each other.

I don't. I care more about how people generally see all the Mormon sects and recognize them all as being LDS or Mormon. It's quite simple - if I'm going to discuss Mormonism I'm going to be clear about whether I'm talking about it on a higher level or just in regards to a specific sect. In this thread, I was pointing out that really the whole religion is polygamous in nature. It is not sect-specific. What is sect-specific is the degree to which they are accepting of polygamy.

I think your view to be factually incorrect, over-generalizing, and very much of the I'm-going-to-inform-you-of-what-you-believe attitude.

Okaaay... That's fine that you have that opinion, but you haven't really backed it with any logic or reason as to why you think that.

But if you're completely set on it, I'll just leave you be (I'm not interested in pointless arguments).

If you're not interested in discussion that's fine. I'll respond to your revised response just to be clear and if you choose not to respond that's certainly up to you. I honestly can't think of any rational responses you might have that would disprove anything I have said, so it's probably easiest this way. Thanks for your responses till now!

 

[ArmenianJohn]

ArmenianJohn, I am LDS. I know what I'm talking about here, and I'm just trying to help you get your facts straight.

I have to disagree, I don't think you are correct in what you are talking about here. And I think it's probably because you're subjective on these issues, being a mormon.

If you want to say: "LDS were polygamous at one point", that is a correct statement. But to say "LDS are polygamous" (present tense) is incorrect.

Perhaps the best way to say it is that LDS are all accepting of polygamy to a certain degree. On the one extreme you have the LDS groups like Warren Jeffs' group or the Strangites who are completely accepting of polygamy and practice it today. On the other extreme, you have the RLDS who barely accept it from Joseph Smith - they pretty much reject polygamy but still accept Joseph as their prophet so they accept at least his polygamy. Somewhere in the middle you have the largest mormon sect, the Salt Lake sect, who accept polygamy for their forebears but believe it is forbidden for the current day. But polygamy was established by the LDS prophets in the beginning so all the sects have some acceptance of it, whether barely or full-on embracing polygamy.

The acronym "LDS" refers specifically to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The people I know in the CoC church don't like to be called "LDS" or "Mormon", but rather "Community of Christ" (hence the church name). They don't want to be called "LDS" because they disagree with the doctrine's of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Likewise, I doubt that members of the FLDS group would want to be called "LDS" (though admittedly I don't know any FLDS members personally).

I understand why you would say this. The Salt Lake sect, being the biggest, wishes to monopolize the acronym "LDS" for themselves. They like to say that none of the other mormons even want to be called LDS, and they are probably right about that much of the time. The problem is, an acronym like "LDS" really isn't theirs to make such decisions about. "LDS" simply stands for "Latter Day Saints". It's just an acronym. So, any group in the latter day saint movement can be rightfully called "LDS". The people in some of these groups may not like it for various reasons, but if they consider themselves "Latter day saints" then they are "LDS". I think most just don't want to be associated with the Salt Lake sect, because from what I have heard the Salt Lake sect is very powerful and can persecute the LDS of other sects if they do things the Salt Lake sect dislikes.

I find the Baptist example to be quite fitting: two different churches, which share some history and part of the name, but have very different doctrines. Likewise, the LDS, FLDS, and RLDS all share some history and part of a name, but have very different doctrines.

Well, it's not... You compared one single church to an entire denomination. I think I understand why - in your religion, a "Church" is the entire organization whereas a single group you call a branch or a ward. In Christianity, however, "Church" refers both to the larger body or denomination as well as to a single, individual church. Westboro Baptist is a single church, not their own denomination. Southern Baptist is a denomination, a large one that is made up of many, many individual churches. So, for your comparison to work, you would compare Westboro Baptist to, say, Plains Baptist Church which is an individual Southern Baptist Church. Or, you could have compared the "Regular Baptist" to the Southern Baptist or "American Baptist" churches.... or you could have compared one Christian denomination to another, like Lutheran vs. Methodist.

There are actually many difference between LDS, FLDS, and RLDS-- they are in no way the same church. For example, they all have different texts they consider to be scriptures. Warren Jeffs' FLDS are polygamous and live in isolated compounds, shunning technology. Obviously, Utah-based LDS do not shun technology (else we won't be having this conversation). Utah-based LDS have a great theological interest in family history, which is not shared by RLDS or FLDS. RLDS (or Community of Christ, which they are now called), are theologically very liberal, embracing women and gay clergy, unlike Utah-LDS or FLDS. And these are just a few examples of the difference between these divergent churches.

These are not the differences that would cause one of these groups to be or not be "LDS". What makes all these groups "LDS" is exactly that acronym's meaning, "latter day saints". If a group is part of that movement then they are "LDS". That movement is the Latter Day Saint movement, a "restoration" movement, where the core beliefs are that the Church of Jesus needed to be "restored" and that those in the "restored" church are "latter day saints", and this information comes from Mormon scriptures - the Book of Mormon and D&C - as well as from Joseph Smith and other Mormon "prophets". All these groups share those qualities. That's why they are all LDS.

 

[smaneck]

I honestly can't think of any rational responses you might have that would disprove anything I have said

I'd sure like to see your proof for this statement:
"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

 

[smaneck]

And I think it's probably because you're subjective on these issues, being a mormon.

This statement is objectively true or false:

"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

I'm still waiting to see your evidence of this. Otherwise there is no reason for us to take anything else you have to say on the subject seriously.

 

[withwonderingawe]

John; Here is a link to your profit's declaration of war on the United States of America:

Did you read the link?

“We are invaded by hostile forces, who are evidently assailing us to accomplish our overthrow and destruction…”BY

They were being invaded perhaps you never heard of the Utah War or Buchanan's Blunder?

 

[Masihi]

I'm still waiting for your evidence of this statement:
"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

I'm still waiting for your evidence of this statement:
"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."
Where and when did Joseph Smith say he was another Muhammad. And where precisely does he call "mormonism' the new Islam?
Or were you just slandering him?

Then you can show us where "Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam." If you can't then you did bear false witness. You've only been asked to do this five times now.

I'd sure like to see your proof for this statement:
"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."

This statement is objectively true or false:
"Joseph Smith declared himself to be another mohammed and mormonism to be a new Islam."
I'm still waiting to see your evidence of this. Otherwise there is no reason for us to take anything else you have to say on the subject seriously.

Whats your reasoning for repeating yourself?!
Does it have anything to do with his Christian perspective because I agree with him on this one.

 

[Hammster]

MOD HAT ON



Staff has determined that this thread has run its course. It will be closed permanently.


HAT OFF