Mormanism, but slightly different?

[gort]

BM quote:

:o

<><

 

[Theway]

He probably has long forgotten Christian Forums. We aren't the same people he talked to before.

It's the exact same anti Mormonism propaganda I heard 30 years ago,
or has better cut and pasting technics from web sites improved the effectiveness of your message.

Which of them was an ex-Mormon who knew what she was talking about?

I don't know, when it comes to what the LDS believe I still can't find one.

 

[gort]

Theway quote:

It's the exact same anti Mormonism propaganda I heard 30 years ago,
or has better cut and pasting technics from web sites improved the effectiveness of your message.

GWIT has quite the library of reference material to garner from. A lot she prolly has to hand type herself. I would imagine if the same quotes were to be found at 'anti-mormonism' sites, I would prolly prefer to cut and paste.

And with the advent of new processors, cheaper ram and larger hardrives today, I spose one could cut and paste much much faster.

I still have to wonder why it is that if an 'anti' site' has the same teachings/quotes that a bonafide/official doctrine document it is still termed derogatory?



cie la vie

<><

 

[Blackmarch]

However noting the jump from sep 2003 to apr 2005 makes one wonder on how the heck did Supernat find the thread?

 

[Theway]

I still have to wonder why it is that if an 'anti' site' has the same teachings/quotes that a bonafide/official doctrine document it is still termed derogatory?

It's not the documents it's the interpretation or conclusions drawn from such that are still wrong.

 

[RufustheRed]

It's the exact same anti Mormonism propaganda I heard 30 years ago, or has better cut and pasting technics from web sites improved the effectiveness of your message.

Is the issue the facts of Mormonism or that someone might be a better steward of their time by using that dastardly cut and paste technique? I would recommend that you know your facts before you falsly accuse someone of a deed you have no way of proving.

I don't know, when it comes to what the LDS believe I still can't find one.

Can't find one what?


The 11th commanment:" THOU SHALT NOT CUT AND PASTE - REGARDLESS OF THE VERACITY OF THE CONTENT." That goes for any document including the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine and Covenants.

One of the TOS should prohibit "cutting and pasting." Agreed?

Sven

 

[Rescued One]

It's the exact same anti Mormonism propaganda I heard 30 years ago,
or has better cut and pasting technics from web sites improved the effectiveness of your message.

???Why was your church teaching anti-Mormon propaganda in its priesthood meetings???


Selections from Answers to Gospel Questions
A Course of Study for the Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 1972-73, published by the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, copyright 1972

Search These Commandments
Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, copyright 1984

ETC.

I don't know, when it comes to what the LDS believe I still can't find one.

I guess you guys are falling down on the job!

 

[Rescued One]

It's not the documents it's the interpretation or conclusions drawn from such that are still wrong.

It's so ironic that we told people the same thing when I was a Mormon. We didn't want those "antis" to be right about anything!

 

[Theway]

Can't find one what?

An ex-Mormon who knew what she was talking about

 

[christopher123]

An ex-Mormon who knew what she was talking about

Ah, the humble mormon.


Show me the errors in my posts then, oh humble one, or are you just blowing smoke because you have nothing to add?


"Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information"



Chris <><

PS: Did leeU/usetheforce come back under yet another name?

 

[RufustheRed]

An ex-Mormon who knew what she was talking about

Then you haven't looked very hard, I dare say. I know of many. You know, leaving the Mormon church does not erase what one was taught while a Mormon. It is like you forgetting how to read because you are no longer in elementary school. To think otherwise borders on the absurd.

Sven

 

[A New Dawn]

Then you haven't looked very hard, I dare say. I know of many. You know, leaving the Mormon church does not erase what one was taught while a Mormon. It is like you forgetting how to read because you are no longer in elementary school. To think otherwise borders on the absurd.

Sven

Maybe not, but it sure seems to erase the context of many things, time frames, etc.

 

[RufustheRed]

Maybe not, but it sure seems to erase the context of many things, time frames, etc.

In your opinion, but then again I didn't know you were ever a Mormon.

Every missionary I have conversed with has not denied, in fact have agreed with me, regarding what I have shared with them doctrinally.

Sven

 

[A New Dawn]

In your opinion, but then again I didn't know you were ever a Mormon.

Every missionary I have conversed with has not denied, in fact have agreed with me, regarding what I have shared with them doctrinally.

Sven

Maybe they have, but then, they accept some things that are quite questionable because they fit in with what has been taught to them.

For instance, many here, especially ex-mo's, state continually that eternal progression was a teaching of Joseph Smith's. What they fail to state is that the only time that Joseph Smith mentioned anything like that is in a funeral discourse 2 months before he was killed. That is kind of a stretch from mentioning it once to it being a "teaching" (which implies a well thought-out theology). That is the kind of thing that I was talking about.

 

[Rescued One]

Maybe they have, but then, they accept some things that are quite questionable because they fit in with what has been taught to them.

For instance, many here, especially ex-mo's, state continually that eternal progression was a teaching of Joseph Smith's. What they fail to state is that the only time that Joseph Smith mentioned anything like that is in a funeral discourse 2 months before he was killed. That is kind of a stretch from mentioning it once to it being a "teaching" (which implies a well thought-out theology). That is the kind of thing that I was talking about.

It was at a church conference(CONFERENCE OF THE CHURCH, APRIL, 1844). If you will read the context, it was teaching. If he had lived, he could have gone on and talked about it many more times.

Mr. Smith said, " I want your prayers and faith that I may have the instruction of Almighty God and the gift of the Holy Ghost, so that I may set forth things that are true and which can be easily comprehended by you, and that the testimony may carry conviction to your hearts and minds of the truth of what I shall say. Pray that the Lord may strengthen my lungs, stay the winds, and let the prayers of the Saints to heaven appear, that they may enter into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, for the effectual prayers of the righteous avail much. There is strength here, and I verily believe that your prayers will be heard.

"Before I enter fully into the investigation of the subject which is lying before me, I wish to pave the way and bring up the subject from the beginning, that you may understand it. I will make a few preliminaries, in order that you may understand the subject when I come to it. I do not calculate or intend to please your ears with superfluity of words or oratory, or with much learning; but I calculate [intend] to edify you with the simple truths from heaven.

The Character of God

"In the first place, I wish to go back to the beginning—to the morn of creation. There is the starting point for us to look to, in order to understand and be fully acquainted with the mind, purposes and decrees of the Great Eloheim, who sits in yonder heavens as he did at the creation of the world. It is necessary for us to have an understanding of God himself in the beginning. If we start right, it is easy to go right all the time; but if we start wrong we may go wrong, and it will be a hard matter to get right.

"There are but a very few beings in the world who understand rightly the character of God. The great majority of mankind do not comprehend anything, either that which is past, or that which is to come, as it respects their relationship to God. They do not know, neither do they understand the nature of that relationship; and consequently they know but little above the brute beast, or more than to eat, drink and sleep. This is all man knows about God or His existence, unless it is given by the inspiration of the Almighty..."

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/sermons_talks_interviews/kingfolletsermon.htm

 

[Rescued One]

An ex-Mormon who knew what she was talking about

I'd like to see Mormons refute what people talk about instead of attacking the intelligence of the people who post here. It so easy to say that people don't know what they're talking about, but so hard to prove it.

 

[skylark1]

Maybe they have, but then, they accept some things that are quite questionable because they fit in with what has been taught to them.

For instance, many here, especially ex-mo's, state continually that eternal progression was a teaching of Joseph Smith's. What they fail to state is that the only time that Joseph Smith mentioned anything like that is in a funeral discourse 2 months before he was killed. That is kind of a stretch from mentioning it once to it being a "teaching" (which implies a well thought-out theology). That is the kind of thing that I was talking about.

The sermon is recorded in the Journal of Discourses, with the following title and information:

CHARACTER AND BEING OF GOD-CREATION-



SALVATION OF THE DEAD-THE UNPARDONABLE SIN-

RESURRECTION-BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT, ETC.



[size=+1]"KING FOLLETT DISCOURSE"[/size]



A Discourse, by President Joseph Smith,

delivered at the Conference held near the Temple,

in Nauvoo, April 6, 1844.​

source​

​

The History of the Church, volume 6, page 302, states the following:

President Joseph Smith delivered the following discourse before about twenty thousand Saints, being the funeral sermon of Elder King Follett. Reported by Willard Richards, Wilford Woodruff, Thomas Bullock and William Clayton.

​

Twenty thousand people is a lot!

 

[Theway]

I'd like to see Mormons refute what people talk about instead of attacking the intelligence of the people who post here. It so easy to say that people don't know what they're talking about, but so hard to prove it.

This was a tongue in cheek response to post #20 in which it was you who seemed to be implying that the intelligence of previous anti Mormonism posters was not adequate. Also that the LDS have no understanding of thier own doctrine and need you interpret it for us.

 

[christopher123]

For instance, many here, especially ex-mo's, state continually that eternal progression was a teaching of Joseph Smith's. What they fail to state is that the only time that Joseph Smith mentioned anything like that is in a funeral discourse 2 months before he was killed. That is kind of a stretch from mentioning it once to it being a "teaching" (which implies a well thought-out theology). That is the kind of thing that I was talking about.

But you are not correct here Jenda to say it was "mentioned once". The discussions here on CF on progression and the nature of God focus just as much on the other LDS statements as on the Follett Funeral Discourse. Smith may have mentioned it once or twice, but the LDS church certainly taught it over and over in general conference and elsewhere repeatedly. Maybe you are correct and the LDS church should of stopped at Joseph Smith's teachings/doctrine, however, it didn't and now they are stuck wiggling around 150 years of other "prophetic teachings".

Don't take this as jumping on you or the Restoration movement, Jenda. I actually hold y'all (and even some principles of the FLDS) in more respect than I do the corporation in Salt Lake. I think you're wrong on some major issues, but at least y'all try to stay consistant and aren't afraid to say no to obvious problems or issues (i.e. BOA).


Chris <><

 

[Zippythepinhead]

Well there is this gorgeous young lady I really care about. And as it so happens so is a Morman. This is a slight problem...or so I would think. I am a Southern Baptist and you can probably already see problems arrising. But the fact is that we enjoy each other a lot and her beliefs do not seem to line up with this "Cult Mormanism" I have always heard about. But I still wanna try to discuss with her about how The Book of Morman is not to be thought of on the same infalliable level of the Bible and discuss some of the other beliefs that Mormans have that do not line up with the bible. Here are the oddites of her family's mormanism though.

Point A) I have always been told that Mormans are going to hell because they do not believe in getting saved... Umm..not exactly. Sarah (her name) and her family believe that Jesus died for our sins and through His death and resurrection we have a free gift of eterenal life if we only repent and ask Jesus into our hearts to save us. Is this not exactly what we Baptists,Pentecostals,etc... believe? So, this means they are sinners saved by grace just like me and my pastor and (I assume) you guys. And it also means they have a place waiting for them in heaven.

Point B) Given point A: would this make them almost just a different Denomination of Christianity instead of a different Faith? And when asked, they call themselves Christians. They don't say. "We are mormans". They simply reply we are Christians. And if asked what kind of chrsitians they would reply Morman. (Not what I have been told all my life).

They go to a LDS church and everything. But this just doesn't seem like the "Cult" I have heard they were all my life. But my problem is that they use the Book Of Morman like it is the end all book. Whereas the Bible is the only book that is infallible to the nith degree. (btw didn't the Book of Morman get slightly revisd not long ago because it wasn't "politcally correct" with the black and white issue? or is that some other book?) But I am honestly looking for some help on discussing with her about Things like the BoM, and the way they must go out on 2 year missionary trips because it is practically a necessity for a place in a church etc... Any help whatsoever would be greatly appreciated. Also any other info on the Morman faith that I have not listed above that is different would be great info for me to know. I know about the "after life" they are supposed to have (the whole planet thingy). I have yet to ask Sarah if she believes in this afterlife or not. Thx for any help what so ever.

If you want some answers PM me. I have posted to this broken record enough. Zippythemormonpinhead