Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Are you serious? An angel and a prophet are not the same thing, no matter how much you want to twist the Word of God and the meanings of words. Abraham was a man.
You are mistaken, mainstream Christianity does NOT teach that we will become angels - nowhere is it taught in the Bible. You should do some research on what mainstream Christianity actually teaches because it's obvious you are unaware.
I have faith in Christ - period. Adding additional books to God's Word is a grave danger and I will pray that God will open your eyes.
It is telling that Joseph Smith claims all other churches are false and the members of such are going to hell if they don't convert to Mormonism.
So, no, Mormons do not see all believers as brothers and sisters.
That is not what Peter taught - at all. The NT teaches about 'perish' and hell is in no way defined as 'glory'. Basically, telestial glory is where we live now - on the earth -according to Mormons.Doctrine and Covenants 76:71Â[bless and do not curse]
the 3 main degrees of glory. Hell is spoken of as spirit prison taught by Peter until the last resurrection when they can be resurrected to the telestial glory.
This seems loving, too.....oh......wait......???
Brigham Young said. . .
"But He did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong." (Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," Vol. 2, page 171. - 1855)
When I was on the mission I was impressed to hear arguments that weren't parroted. I'm well-versed in what traditional/mainstream (if you notice I refer to mainstream as traditional and not biblical) Christianity. I've even had to explain the trinity theory to trinitarians because I get multiple verses of this theory from people who profess to believe in it.
Do you have anything useful to add to the conversation?Ok. Good job. You can quote. So can we. Heck, so can a 5 year old. All other churches do teach of Christ but because they do not have the fullness of the gospel they are still wrong. I've read the creeds and they're very...how can I put this...poorly written. They are not authoritative.
that is an obvious and horribly repeated tactic of yours to change the subject.The words of the First Vision were to Joseph in a solitary setting.
How is that reproving?
Is ... turning people black to keep His white and "delightsome" folks from being enticed ... reproving love to those who were re-pigmented?
-- 2 Nephi 5:21
You don't even know what an angel is. There is more than one definition yet you're trying to force the word to be confined to one definition and that's it. These are the definitions of "angel":
-a messenger of God
-a supernatural being, either good or bad, to whom are attributed greater than human power, intelligence, etc.
-a guiding spirit or influence: one's good angel
-a conventionalized image of a white-robed figure in human form with wings and a halo
-a person regarded as being as beautiful, good, innocent, etc. as an angel: said esp. of women and children
-an English gold coin, last issued in 1634, stamped with an image of the archangel Michael and the dragon
-a supporter who provides money, as for producing a play
-a radar echo from something other than an aircraft, as from birds or rain
Was Abraham a messenger of God or not? If he wasn't an angel he wasn't a prophet going by the first definition of "angel". If he wasn't a prophet then a lot of the Bible is blatantly wrong.
No, I'm pretty right on this one too. Here are the verses Christians use:
Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
Do I really have to give you a list of arguments critics use? Do you not know what your peers say? I've heard nearly all of the arguments. When I was on the mission I was impressed to hear arguments that weren't parroted. I'm well-versed in what traditional/mainstream (if you notice I refer to mainstream as traditional and not biblical) Christianity. I've even had to explain the trinity theory to trinitarians because I get multiple verses of this theory from people who profess to believe in it.
If you have faith in God why do you require evidence? It seems like you have more trust in evidence than you do in God.
As if I haven't heard that one before. Where is the danger of God giving more of His word? Is He powerless to do so? Does He not love us anymore? Do we not need Him anymore? My eyes are open to God and the Lamb of God, He who is Jesus Christ. The gospel has been restored. The Book of Mormon is true. If the Book of Mormon weren't true it would have died off long ago.
Like I said before, do you want me to list of the criticisms your peers give since you don't know what they are?
There are no critics when one is exposing a cult.
That is not what Peter taught - at all. The NT teaches about 'perish' and hell is in no way defined as 'glory'. Basically, telestial glory is where we live now - on the earth -according to Mormons.
It is in direct conflict with what the Bible actually teaches, the D/C adds to what was already established in the Bible, regarding hell. Mormons have conveniently left out the word 'perish', 'hell', 'eternal torment'.
You need to define believer so we know what you mean?
18 For Christ also hath once asuffered for sins, the just for the bunjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to cdeath in the flesh, but quickened by the dSpirit:
19 By which also he went and apreached unto the bspirits in cprison;
20 aWhich sometime were bdisobedient, when once the clongsuffering of God waited in the days of dNoah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were esaved by fwater.
5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to ajudge the bquick and the dead.
6 aFor for this cause was the bgospel cpreached also to them that are ddead, that they might be ejudged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
We would wait a long time indeed since mainstream christianity doesn't follow the Bible.you will need to provide resources and quotes of mainstream Christianity believing we will become angels.
I'm waiting......
Way to take scripture WAY out of context.We would wait a long time indeed since mainstream christianity doesn't follow the Bible.
Daniel: "the man Gabriel."
Rev: "according to the measure of a man, that is the angel."
etc.
A critic of the church trying to tell us what we supposedly believe is like a cow trying to say meow.
Hi, Moodshadow
Yes, the church has a cloroxed version of history. All churches do. They don't talk about the sins of their founders, etc. You are correct about this.
That doesn't mean that all the stuff everyone else says is true either. And this.
What is "real" LDS history? That proposed by the Tanners? I have read only enough of the Tanners' stuff to know that it is pretty rabid. In my research I tried very hard to avoid rabid material, coming from both perspectives. It was my objective to get unbiased fact it if was available at all.
Maybe you believe the "Spalding Manuscript" fiction? I took a good look at that one because it was a major reason my dad left I think. Funny how everyone every place he went to calls him "old man Spalding" unless he referred to himself that way....or maybe that whole story is made up by one author? I wouldn't know; I never got into Spalding at all.
Do you honestly believe an uneducated farm boy could write the Book of Mormon complete with the many chiasmi like the Bible has? Chiasmi show a very intentional underlying writing style that has to be carefully planned, and weren't even recognized in scriptures by American circles until after the time Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon.
Joseph Smith also got 2 unknown places in Saudi Arabia correct in the Book of Mormon - the only perennial stream[river Laman] to the ocean for hundreds of miles in "the valley of Lemuel" and Nahom, a semitically correct spelling of an actual small village in Arabia.
Perhaps the spirit knows more than man....
You got that right.
Way to take scripture WAY out of context.
....but that's what cults do.....
The problem is, its not what is there, its what is NOT there. I havent read the whole book, but from what I did read,I found no mention of some key elements the bible holds.
Question 1. is there a lake of glass mentioned there? Does the BoM describe its location?
Question 2. Is there a description of Gods throne?
Question 3. Are there any details of the anti-christ?
These are very important subjects to me, as the bible contains this information, and I believe anything which purports to be an extension of the bible should address these issues in some manner as the bible does in Ezekiel, Isaiah, Daniel, and Revelation.
The bible is actually a witness of creation from beginning to end. Does the BoM contain information to this effect?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?