Praise to the Man!

[Toms777]

There is difference between judging doctrine/actions and judging the motives of the heart.
QUOTE]

Which of these two differences cause a person to be so loathsome that Jesus would classify them as swine?

My all time favorite Calvin and Hobbs cartoon was when Calvin asked Hobbs if God judges us by our actions or by what is in our hearts? Hobbs responded that our actions are the result of what is in our hearts. I am certain that this good Christian Cartoonist was on the money with that perspective.

Jesus is God and can judge the heart. We cannot.

My doctrine comes from the Bible, and though I will agree with Calvin and Hobbes on this point, I do not consider Calvin and Hobbes to be a source of doctrine.

 

[fatboys]

Show me a single quote where they expressed hatred for individual Mormons.

(I went through this with another gent who tried to prove that Richard Abanes was anti-Mormon and failed to do so).

If you cannot do so, then you are simply making a personal attack against these people.

FB: I did not say they hate people, but they do hate Joseph Smith. They hate the doctrines he taught. They are more than anti mormons. But as I said, anti mormon means that they are against all that name means. Not just the name of a man. Anti mormons teach against the history of the church. They teach against the doctrines. All of these things you have done.

 

[Toms777]

FB: I did not say they hate people, but they do hate Joseph Smith. They hate the doctrines he taught. They are more than anti mormons. But as I said, anti mormon means that they are against all that name means. Not just the name of a man. Anti mormons teach against the history of the church. They teach against the doctrines. All of these things you have done.

Opposing the doctriens does not make anyone anti-Mormon. If they do not hate the people, then you use anti-Mormon as a slur. You can try to make whatever claims that you want by changing the definition, but the dictionary is clear and you are falsely accusing these people of being anti-Mormons.

Just for your benefit and as a reminder:

Mormon An ancient prophet believed to have compiled a sacred history of the Americas, which were translated and published by Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon in 1830. A member of the Mormon Church. Also called Latter-day Saint. Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Mormonism The doctrine, system, and practices of the Mormons. Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

anti A prefix meaning against, opposite or opposed to, contrary, or in place of; -- used in composition in many English words. It is often shortened to ant-; as, antacid, antarctic.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

Persisting to use the term as a slur against those who disagree with you actually shows that you are doing what you accuse others of doing. You are attacking the person through false accusing.

So, now you claim that they hate Joseph Smith. Show me the quote.

 

[MormonFriend]

Jesus is God and can judge the heart. We cannot.

My doctrine comes from the Bible, and though I will agree with Calvin and Hobbes on this point, I do not consider Calvin and Hobbes to be a source of doctrine.

Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed. (1 Samuel2:3)

For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: ......
(Proverbs23:7)

God can judge our hearts simply by observing our actions.

Lets not do what you always do and veer away from the point. You made a difference between judging actions and judging the intent of the heart. They are one in the same.

Furthurmore:

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.(Hebrews4:12)

So when a person has and understands the word of God, then it becomes a tool to know the hearts of others. We can certainly judge that person in light of knowing what is in his heart, but not condemn in judgment to his final status pertaining to his salvation.

 

[MormonFriend]

The History of the Church contains some statements which show that Joseph Smith felt he was almost equal with God: Mormons do attempt to elevate Joseph Smith to equivalency with God.
Mormons rely on Joseph Smith for their SALVATION according to their Prophet Brigham Young.

I am a Mormon and as such have been taught, and I well understand, that I can rely on no one but Jesus the Christ for salvation. What you have quoted is correct, but your understanding of it is non existant, for the following reason. (This analogy discribes the misunderstanding.)

The Puzzle


If I had a jig saw puzzle of MT. Fuji, and you had one of Niagara Falls, you could not take one piece of my puzzle and say it is invalid because it does not fit in your picture. Yet this is what the critics of the LDS church do.



The Bible, with all of its teachings, can appear to be a puzzle. Its pieces are put together in so many different configurations, that the picture looks different each time a person fits the pieces together, according to his perceptions and understanding. Hence, new churches are formed.
A person can memorize the Bible, and know every shape and color of each piece, but how these pieces fit together is the key to understanding the mysteries of God, which is hidden from the princes of the world.


The LDS concept of putting the puzzle together.

Most people have learned that the four corners are the easiest pieces to put in place. Likewise, there are four basic gospel principles and ordinances that must first be understood and applied before we can assemble the rest of the picture. These are faith, repentance, baptism, and receiving the Gift of The Holy Ghost. (Please check it out in Hebrews 5 and 6. The Christian teachers were being chastised by Paul for being dull of hearing to the extent that Paul couldn’t penetrate their minds or hearts with the message of Christ. He states that they must be taught again the basics. In the first few verses of chapter 6, Paul relates what those basics are.)
There is one more puzzle piece that is unique and obvious in its shape. That is Christ! He is the center of everything. We put Him at the Center of our lives, so symbolically, this piece is round and is placed in the very center of the puzzle. The corners are only properly affixed when we have (corner 1)faith in Christ, (corner 2)repent because Christ made it possible, (corner 3) are baptized in the name of Christ and take His name upon ourselves, and in return, (corner 4) Christ gives us the Holy Ghost through His ordained servants. As we learn to receive and utilize this precious gift that Christ gave us, we begin to see where the rest of the pieces go as the Holy Ghost reveals it to us (line upon line and precept upon precept). If we ever remove any of our three corners by not applying our faith (with works), repenting of our sins, or violating the covenants we made in the waters of baptism, then we loose the fourth corner, or the influence of the Holy Ghost, and with that, the ability to understand the things of God..

So, when you quote these things in our doctrine, you do not know where they fit in the full picture. When you have your four corners in place, I promise you that you will understand.

 

[ah_muse]

Joseph Smith boasted that he did more than Jesus to keep a church together.
Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was more correct than the Bible.
Joseph Smith made a false prophecy.
Joseph Smith said mothers have babies in eternity and some are on thrones.
Joseph Smith said there are many Gods.
Joseph Smith said the Trinity is three gods.
Joseph Smith said God was once a man.
Joseph Smith said our greatest responsibility is to seek after our dead.
Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon

 

[ah_muse]

I have no idea what your connection is here.

the real Joseph Smith

 

[MormonFriend]

Today the Joseph Smith of Mormon adoration is a highly romanticized version of the real Joseph Smith. His personal character was far from the saintly image his followers mold him into. His strong egotism and drive for power, together with his deceptive practices led ultimately to his destruction.

OK, I see your connection. My point is still valid. Did you know him personally?

How did you obtain the quotes from which you claim he was not "saintly"? Were not these quotes obtained through hard work and the presrevation of his followers of early Church History, and still made readily available by his followers of the modern Church? We are not trying to portray Joseph any different that what he is and was.

So how do you come up with:

His personal character was far from the saintly image his followers mold him into.

We are the first to acknowledge, after Joseph himself, that he is far from perfect. But his positive attributes far exceeded his negative, as I hope do mine.

I hope you read my analogy "The Puzzle" posted below.

 

[MormonFriend]

Joseph Smith boasted that he did more than Jesus to keep a church together.
Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was more correct than the Bible.
Joseph Smith made a false prophecy.
Joseph Smith said mothers have babies in eternity and some are on thrones.
Joseph Smith said there are many Gods.
Joseph Smith said the Trinity is three gods.
Joseph Smith said God was once a man.
Joseph Smith said our greatest responsibility is to seek after our dead.
Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon

The Puzzle


If I had a jig saw puzzle of MT. Fuji, and you had one of Niagara Falls, you could not take one piece of my puzzle and say it is invalid because it does not fit in your picture. Yet this is what the critics of the LDS church do.



The Bible, with all of its teachings, can appear to be a puzzle. Its pieces are put together in so many different configurations, that the picture looks different each time a person fits the pieces together, according to his perceptions and understanding. Hence, new churches are formed.
A person can memorize the Bible, and know every shape and color of each piece, but how these pieces fit together is the key to understanding the mysteries of God, which is hidden from the princes of the world.


The LDS concept of putting the puzzle together.

Most people have learned that the four corners are the easiest pieces to put in place. Likewise, there are four basic gospel principles and ordinances that must first be understood and applied before we can assemble the rest of the picture. These are faith, repentance, baptism, and receiving the Gift of The Holy Ghost. (Please check it out in Hebrews 5 and 6. The Christian teachers were being chastised by Paul for being dull of hearing to the extent that Paul couldn’t penetrate their minds or hearts with the message of Christ. He states that they must be taught again the basics. In the first few verses of chapter 6, Paul relates what those basics are.)
There is one more puzzle piece that is unique and obvious in its shape. That is Christ! He is the center of everything. We put Him at the Center of our lives, so symbolically, this piece is round and is placed in the very center of the puzzle. The corners are only properly affixed when we have (corner 1)faith in Christ, (corner 2)repent because Christ made it possible, (corner 3) are baptized in the name of Christ and take His name upon ourselves, and in return, (corner 4) Christ gives us the Holy Ghost through His ordained servants. As we learn to receive and utilize this precious gift that Christ gave us, we begin to see where the rest of the pieces go as the Holy Ghost reveals it to us (line upon line and precept upon precept). If we ever remove any of our three corners by not applying our faith (with works), repenting of our sins, or violating the covenants we made in the waters of baptism, then we loose the fourth corner, or the influence of the Holy Ghost, and with that, the ability to understand the things of God..

So, when you quote these things in our doctrine, you do not know where they fit in the full picture. When you have your four corners in place, I promise you that you will understand. ( the men living on the moon have nothing to do with our doctrine, and I believe Joseph was expressing a personal belief.)

 

[Toms777]

God can judge our hearts simply by observing our actions.

My God can judge our hearts and thus does not need to judge external appearances (i.e. actions).

Heb 4:12-13
12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
NKJV

God can judge thoughts and intents, and since he is omnipotent and omniscience, needs not wait for our actions to judge. Thus, no these are not one and the same.

Further, judging by external appearances and actions can be mis-leading. God judgement of the heart reveals all.

So when a person has and understands the word of God, then it becomes a tool to know the hearts of others. We can certainly judge that person in light of knowing what is in his heart, but not condemn in judgment to his final status pertaining to his salvation.

Hebrews 10:30 For we know him that said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

 

[Toms777]

I am a Mormon and as such have been taught, and I well understand, that I can rely on no one but Jesus the Christ for salvation. What you have quoted is correct, but your understanding of it is non existant, for the following reason. (This analogy discribes the misunderstanding.)

So, when you quote these things in our doctrine, you do not know where they fit in the full picture. When you have your four corners in place, I promise you that you will understand.

Mormonism teaches that we have to rely under Joseph Smith for salvation:

Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethren and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were wasted away, something that no doubt will mortify them-something that, to say the least, is a matter of deep regret to them-namely, that no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.
(Journal of Discrouses, Vol. 7 P. 289)

 

[fatboys]

My God can judge our hearts and thus does not need to judge external appearances (i.e. actions).

Heb 4:12-13
12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
NKJV

God can judge thoughts and intents, and since he is omnipotent and omniscience, needs not wait for our actions to judge. Thus, no these are not one and the same.

Further, judging by external appearances and actions can be mis-leading. God judgement of the heart reveals all.

Hebrews 10:30 For we know him that said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

FB: Then why on earth should we go through this life if God can judge us and then place us in Heaven or Hell. First you say that God's intent was to have a perfect earth, and knew Adam and Eve were going to transgress, and did not stop it. Why? Why make us go through this life for nothing. As I have asked many times, why did God create in the first place? If all he had to do was create and judge and save without him having to come here and go through the pain and suffereing for our sins. And why does someone have to suffer for our sins. The justice of God is controlled by God. Why did not have to pay for anything? I know there are alot of whys here, but you have to wonder, if what you believe about God is true, that this life is a waste of time, and much pain and suffering has been caused by God who could not get it right the first time and continually has to change his plans in order to get us back to him.

 

[fatboys]

Mormonism teaches that we have to rely under Joseph Smith for salvation:

Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethren and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were wasted away, something that no doubt will mortify them-something that, to say the least, is a matter of deep regret to them-namely, that no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.
(Journal of Discrouses, Vol. 7 P. 289)

FB: Tom, you say you are not anti mormon. Yet you post statements which we are not bound by to teach or believe in. Stick to doctrine. It is not our doctrine. It is not important to us what part Joseph Smith has in the next life.

But lets ask this question. What part does Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses Elijiah have in he last days. See if you understood what we believed, you would know that they held the keys of dispensations. And if what we believe is true, and Joseph Smith was a prophet who ushered in the last dispensation of the fullness of times, then he holds those keys which included the authority that was restored for eternal progression. And any person who is obedient to those restored truths, will have the consent of Joseph Smith who holds those keys. This is not doctrine, but speculation. Joseph Smith has not power except what is given to him of Christ. You may not like the thoughts of it, but if what we believe is true, then we certainly have the right to look at it any way we want. It is not your belief, so it should not concern you. The only reason you bring up such statements is to SLUR Joseph Smith and those who believe he was a true prophet. It is meant to SLUR those who follow such a belief. There is nothing that you bring up that is not a SLUR Tom.

 

[Toms777]

FB: Then why on earth should we go through this life if God can judge us and then place us in Heaven or Hell. First you say that God's intent was to have a perfect earth, and knew Adam and Eve were going to transgress, and did not stop it. Why? Why make us go through this life for nothing. As I have asked many times, why did God create in the first place? If all he had to do was create and judge and save without him having to come here and go through the pain and suffereing for our sins. And why does someone have to suffer for our sins. The justice of God is controlled by God. Why did not have to pay for anything? I know there are alot of whys here, but you have to wonder, if what you believe about God is true, that this life is a waste of time, and much pain and suffering has been caused by God who could not get it right the first time and continually has to change his plans in order to get us back to him.

First, I ahve to say that whether or not we can reason out things, we have to accept that God is God and He is just and whether or not you understand it, it remains true if it is in the Bible.

Prov 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
And lean not on your own understanding;
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He shall direct your paths.
NKJV

I see nothing in scripture that says that God wanted robots.

 

[Toms777]

FB: Tom, you say you are not anti mormon. Yet you post statements which we are not bound by to teach or believe in. Stick to doctrine. It is not our doctrine. It is not important to us what part Joseph Smith has in the next life.

If you claim that I am anti-Mormon, show me where I have stated that I hate individuals who believe in Mormonism (when will you ever get off this track?).

I have accurately presented details, which can be substantiated which have been taught by the Mormon church and it's leadership. I intend to continue to do so.

But lets ask this question. What part does Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses Elijiah have in he last days. See if you understood what we believed, you would know that they held the keys of dispensations. And if what we believe is true, and Joseph Smith was a prophet who ushered in the last dispensation of the fullness of times, then he holds those keys which included the authority that was restored for eternal progression. And any person who is obedient to those restored truths, will have the consent of Joseph Smith who holds those keys. This is not doctrine, but speculation. Joseph Smith has not power except what is given to him of Christ. You may not like the thoughts of it, but if what we believe is true, then we certainly have the right to look at it any way we want. It is not your belief, so it should not concern you. The only reason you bring up such statements is to SLUR Joseph Smith and those who believe he was a true prophet. It is meant to SLUR those who follow such a belief. There is nothing that you bring up that is not a SLUR Tom.

First, if you believe that accurately quoting Joseph Smith and others is a slur on Joseph Smith, then I can only say that perhaps Joseph Smith should have been more careful about what he said, or should have renounced such teachings if he did not believe them; or if you find them to be offensive, you should renounce them.

If the Mormon church rejects such false teachings, then shouw me where they have renounced the teachings of their "prophet".

 

[spike]

Okay, so if the leadership of a religion orders the massacre of civilians, that does not say anything negative about the religion? Is that your position?

The key words are leadership and religion. They are two very different things, and not always tied together at the hip. To wit, the leadership of a church, by men and their decisions, does not necessarily rule how I practice my religion and my relationship with God..

Now, Tom, I'm betting that if you look hard enough, you will find reference within the Bible to God ordering the complete destruction of a particular town. I am not referring to the standard Sodom and Gommorah story. I can't quote the verse as I am not carrying mine on me at the moment, but it is there. I'll find it for you should you not know of what I am referring to.

Church leadership - of any church - is always possible of committing the wrong acts in the eyes of God while claiming to do so in His name. Again, history is filled with more examples than I can shake a stick at for all religions, and I will not bother to run the Google search for something that exists in plenitude and that you are well aware of. You can be as selective as you wish - but you need to realize that your base point of argumentation - that LDS faithful hold J. Smith in greater reverence than J. Christ, is erroneous, and continues to lead you down this path of faulty reasoning in trying to prove this point that does not exist. Hence, your harping on the 'importance' of Smith in the eyes of the faithful as you interpret it based upon - of all things - song lyrics and articles from 150 years ago. You then proceed to dismiss the intentions, validity and opinions of all members, current day, of the church based upon your judgement of Smith - and, yes, this is a judgement - and the idea that he is the 'head' and soul of the LDS church. This isn't the most logical or convincing approach. Why not ask a member of the church who they are praying to?

I have an excellent Christian friend who belongs to a local non-denominational church. I have noted that the stucture of this church is not at all like the standard heirarchal model that I grew up within. It does not have the long history of a central leadership with which to examine the history of, or take notes on the errors of its ways. Perhaps this is the problem today; rigid control at the head of an organization - in this case, a church - can result, sometimes, in the wrong decisions being made or condoned. However, this does not condemn all of its members, or imply that all members agree with leadership. Case in point - if every Mormon that was alive at the moment participated in the Meadows massacre for all of the wrong reasons, then all members would be guilty of committing a grievous sin in the eyes of the Lord. However, the event was committed by those that took up arms and committed the act. These are the ones who will be judged by the Hand of God. I refuse to judge those that had no power to change events or who were not present but were still members of the same faith. Neither can I invalidate an entire Christ-centered (yes, sorry, but it is) religion based upon particular incidents perpetrated by certain men. I would hope that you would not judge as well the intent of those innocent followers, or for that matter, even the intent of the wording of a hymn.

Besides, if that isn't falling squarely into the 'anti' camp, which you seem to abhor (why on earth - your interpreted definition isn't what your dictionary says) - then I don't know what is going to move you any closer.

Have a great morning..!

-spike-

 

[spike]

If you claim that I am anti-Mormon, show me where I have stated that I hate individuals who believe in Mormonism (when will you ever get off this track?).

Because you presented it, I will repeat your anti-definition...

anti - A prefix meaning against, opposite or opposed to, contrary, or in place of; -- used in composition in many English words. It is often shortened to ant-; as, antacid, antarctic.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

I do not see the use of the word, 'hate' in there. However, if you are " against, opposite or opposed to" the LDS Theology (read as I see you defining it: J.Smiths preachings/statements), then, you are, by your own stated definition, anti-mormon, or anti-LDST. While you cannot 'see' why others make this claim with regards to your opinion, it is pretty plain that your own definition fits the bill. Please don't bother taking offense. Remember, I'm anti-being-eaten-by-lions, and I have nothing against them.

-spike-

 

[Toms777]

The key words are leadership and religion. They are two very different things, and not always tied to the hip. To wit, the leadership of a church, by men and their decisions, does not necessarily rule how I practice my religion and my relationship with God..

I don't know how you practice your religion, what your personal beliefs are or any variants from Mormonism thereof. I am discussing the teachings and doctrines of Mormonism.

Now, Tom, I'm betting that if you look hard enough, you will find reference within the Bible to God ordering the complete destruction of a particular town. I am not referring to the standard Sodom and Gommorah story. I can't quote the verse as I am not carrying mine on me at the moment, but it is there. I'll find it for you should you not know of what I am referring to.

The point is????

Church leadership - of any church - is always possible of committing the wrong acts in the eyes of God while claiming to do so in His name. Again, history is filled with more examples than I can shake a stick at for all religions, and I will not bother to run the Google search for something that exists in plenitude and that you are well aware of. You can be as selective as you wish - but you need to realize that your base point of argumentation - that LDS faithful hold J. Smith in greater reverence than J. Christ, is erroneous, and continues to lead you down this path of faulty reasoning in trying to prove this point that does not exist. Hence, your harping on the 'importance' of Smith in the eyes of the faithful as you interpret it based upon - of all things - song lyrics and articles from 150 years ago. You then proceed to dismiss the intentions, validity and opinions of all members, current day, of the church based upon your judgement of Smith - and, yes, this is a judgement - and the idea that he is the 'head' and soul of the LDS church. This isn't the most logical or convincing approach. Why not ask a member of the church who they are praying to?

No, I disagree. This hymn is a great example, and I am sure that you are well aware that I could fill a book with examples of the church leadership teaching that Joseph Smith is given many attributes that solely belong to God. the fact that no one can explain away the attributes given in the hymn other than to tell me that I am wrong is quite notable.

And I also note that no Mormons to date have told me that they renounce this hymn as heretical and blasphemous.

Why don't I ask who they are praying to? I have, I have asked on here whether Mormons believe in one God or three. Almost all say three. Then I ask if they worship one or three, some say three, others say one. The ones that say one, I ask which God they worhsip, and they say all three. Hard to get a straight answer.

So how many Gods do you worship?

Besides, if that isn't falling squarely into the 'anti' camp, which you seem to abhor (why on earth - your interpreted definition isn't what your dictionary says) - then I don't know what is going to move you any closer.

You can disagree with teh dictionary, but the words don't change. If you hold to your definition, then I could legimiately call you "anti-Christian".

Personally I prefer an approach without name calling and based upon personal respect, but for some reason, I find an unusual number of Mormons who prefer name-calling. Why is that?

 

[Toms777]

Because you presented it, I will repeat your anti-definition...

anti - A prefix meaning against, opposite or opposed to, contrary, or in place of; -- used in composition in many English words. It is often shortened to ant-; as, antacid, antarctic.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

I do not see the use of the word, 'hate' in there. However, if you are " against, opposite or opposed to" the LDS Theology (read as I see you defining it: J.Smiths preachings/statements), then, you are, by your own stated definition, anti-mormon, or anti-LDST. While you cannot 'see' why others make this claim with regards to your opinion, it is pretty plain that your own definition fits the bill. Please don't bother taking offense. Remember, I'm anti-being-eaten-by-lions, and I have nothing against them.

-spike-

Okay, since you want to deal with semantics, then an "anti-mormon" would be opposing indidvidual Mormons as people rather than Mormonism and it's doctrines.

So show me where I am opposed to mormons as people rather than the doctrines.

The definition thaty you put forward simply does not fit into the dictionary definition of what a Mormon is (I note that you did not quote that definition).

If I called you "anti-being eaten by lions, that would not be descriptive of what you are would it? Anti- descriptions never describe a person, they describe what they are not. In this case, the anti-Mormon terms is not even accurate, so it does not even describe what these persons are not. Why not describe what people are, or better still drop the labels, stop watsing all this time at trying to create a negative image or slur of other people and deal with the issues at hand?

Why do Mormon fight so vigorously for the right to slur others through name-calling?

 

[spike]

I don't know how you practice your religion, what your personal beliefs are or any variants from Mormonism thereof. I am discussing the teachings and doctrines of Mormonism.

Yes, as you interpret and experience them. It will not be the same as any other individual.

The point is????

Only that this does not sway my faith in God. Certainly, the actions of simple men wouldn't either.

No, I disagree. This hymn is a great example, and I am sure that you are well aware that I could fill a book with examples of the church leadership teaching that Joseph Smith is given many attributes that solely belong to God. The fact that no one can explain away the attributes given in the hymn other than to tell me that I am wrong is quite notable.

I just don't see those 'attributes' in the same way. Songs have been written about, and men have been 'praised' in literature for millenia. Yes, some of the terminology is the same as that which has been written in praise of God and Christ; this does not render those descriptive phrases moot or give them the ability to describe only one individual or entity once used. If I remember correctly, az_sunshine provided other Biblical reference to 'praises to men'. Secondly, the lyrics hardly claim greatness more significant than Christ. Certainly, they are going to be interpreted as being 'over the top' by others outside the faith, but for those within it, their references to the man that brought together their church are not exactly unreasonable - and not indicative of greater worthiness than Christ.

And I also note that no Mormons to date have told me that they renounce this hymn as heretical and blasphemous.

I've never asked myself.

Why don't I ask who they are praying to? I have, I have asked on here whether Mormons believe in one God or three. Almost all say three. Then I ask if they worship one or three, some say three, others say one. The ones that say one, I ask which God they worhsip, and they say all three. Hard to get a straight answer.

So how many Gods do you worship?

I say my prayers to God and Christ. This would imply, to many, that because I see them as separate beings, that I am polytheistic, or subsequently tritheistic. I have never sat and composed prayer to the Holy Spirit as defined as such. Regardless, I realize that my opinions are at odds with those that believe God and Christ to be 'one' in the strictest sense of the word, but my interpretation of the Bible is not based on official decree of hundreds of years ago, but rather, the words as recorded within the Bible itself, and there seem to be many of them that support my belief. This is bound to offend someone, but remarkably, it doesn't seem to hamper my ability to do my best to lead a life in accordance with Christ's principles (and it won't hamper their's either), and if I am in error, then He will judge me on my last day with regards to my beliefs.

You can disagree with teh dictionary, but the words don't change. If you hold to your definition, then I could legimiately call you "anti-Christian".

This still isn't making much sense. It only looks as if it might hold water if you define LDS Theology as being opposite, or opposed to the teachings of Christ. There's a hefty subject for debate, and it would be largely a losing proposition.

Personally I prefer an approach without name calling and based upon personal respect, but for some reason, I find an unusual number of Mormons who prefer name-calling. Why is that?

Again, not name calling. It only serves to facilitate the identification of opinion or sentiment. Remember my lion example. Additionally, I haven't noticed the incidence of name-calling to be any greater within the LDS community as what I notice outside of it. Can you suggest an alternate descriptive term that would sum up your feelings/beliefs about LDS theology? Not a joke; I'm curious as to how you would rather see it defined.

Have a pleasant brunch..

-spike-