Mormanism, but slightly different?

[Zippythepinhead]

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.

I think the same can be said in reverse.

 

[Rescued One]

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.

I haven't made any comments about LDS not understanding their own doctrines nor have I tried to interpret them for you.

As for those posting against Mormonisn, some of them have never been LDS so we can help them gain more knowledge of it. It doesn't mean they lack intelligence!

 

[Zippythepinhead]

I haven't made any comments about LDS not understanding their own doctrines nor have I tried to interpret them for you.

As for those posting against Mormonisn, some of them have never been LDS so we can help them gain more knowledge of it. It doesn't mean they lack intelligence!

I am not questioning anyone's intelligence. Sanity maybe, but not intelligence. Just Kidding

 

[skylark1]

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

Zippy,

Th person who started this post hasn't visited this forum since September, 2003!. That was over a year and a half ago! I seriously doubt that he will be contacting you.

I am curious how supernat managed to find the thread in order to bump it up for his first and only post here. He could teach me some search skills!

 

[A New Dawn]

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 <><

You have just proved what I said in my original statement on this subject. Joseph Smith mentioned it once, that one statement was built into a theology by Brigham Young. A theology that was not present in the church before Joseph was killed.

As for the other posts, it doesn't matter when it was made, it was a funeral sermon, not an official conference session. Hardly to be taken as binding on the church.

 

[A New Dawn]

Zippy,

Th person who started this post hasn't visited this forum since September, 2003!. That was over a year and a half ago! I seriously doubt that he will be contacting you.

I am curious how supernat managed to find the thread in order to bump it up for his first and only post here. He could teach me some search skills!

Maybe supernat is Dapole.