M
mitex
Guest
He says what YOU agree with. Not what other Mormons agree with. You have left them out of the conversation. You claim to be saving them; yet don’t include them?
Classic move,
- Status
He says what YOU agree with. Not what other Mormons agree with. You have left them out of the conversation. You claim to be saving them; yet don’t include them?
Classic move,
J
Jerusha
Guest
We have the constitutional right of free speech. That includes disagreeing with Mormon beliefs and their version of history.
:banghead:
Actually, your posting style reminds me of that of some Mormons I have interacted with both online and IRL…
:banghead:
Actually, your posting style reminds me of that of some Mormons I have interacted with both online and IRL…
P
PaulDupre
Guest
Ahhhh, no. 1st amendment separation of church and state (which I support) has nothing to do with my (also 1st amendment) constitutional right to disagree with Mormonism publicly, loudly and often.
Are you an American? If so, you should know this.
Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
N
nevadairenaeus
Guest
I’m a former Mormon. The other posters speak for me as well. My wife and children are still in bondage to the Mormon church. Its a false religion started by a false prophet, the kind Jesus warned us about. It is not a Christian faith as we Catholics understand Christianity. There is a real spiritual war being waged. Souls are at stake, including those of my beloved children.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Would it be wrong for you to be obsessed with bringing your friends to truth?In other words your obsessed… Religious freedom means the state stays of of religion, the religion from state, and other religions from each other…
Clearly you are obsessed. Some people are happy as mormons. My bestfriend is a mormon and quite happy.
Another friend is a community of Christ member. She’s very happy.
I doubt you speak for all mormons or former mormons for that matter.
S
SpeSalvi
Guest
Amen.
I, as a former Mormon, frequent the “Mormon” threads on here because I feel as though my apologetics are lacking if my conversion to Catholicism were to ever come into question by any of my LDS family. You’ll see that many of us former Mormons still have a lot of love for the LDS people, just not for the religion. Often, it is out of love for them that we say what we do. If a member of the LDS Church wants to engage in a dialogue that may help them see how distorted the faith is, then of COURSE we will be jumping all over it.
It’s not an obsession with Mormonism. It’s an obsession with spreading the truth in every form of media possible. It’s also an opportunity for those of us still “detoxing” from the LDS church to clearly separate LDS and Catholic teachings.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
Oh piffle, religious freedom means being able to live and proclaim your beliefs without interference from any state agency. Religions and individuals are free to interact with each other as they see fit.
As far as “obsession” goes what is one to think of an Evangelical Protestant who has felt the need to post 400 times in 3 months on a Catholic discussion board?
T
truthsave
Guest
This is a very important point that apparently too many overview. Feeling happy is considered finding the truth. Feeling happy (at least happier it doesn’t mean you have found the truth but that you have found something of good value for you and your psycological world).In other words your obsessed… Religious freedom means the state stays of of religion, the religion from state, and other religions from each other…
Clearly you are obsessed. Some people are happy as mormons. My bestfriend is a mormon and quite happy.
Another friend is a community of Christ member. She’s very happy.
I doubt you speak for all mormons or former mormons for that matter.
This is common in a personal development attitude.
Religion, considered the personal approach to God and so to the truth is not really a personal development attitude. Most of the time the feeling it is the truth is followed by your life ruin. At least at the beginning. Your personal world collapse.
Nobody want to loose their life to find their “life” (as stated many timesin the Gospels) but in this last 20 years it is generally trying to find something that works so you feel better with yourself. But ourselves is not God.
This attitude has been deeply understood by few or most of the Fathers of the Church.
Christianity is so we can become saint and be part of the Glory of God.
Personal development is so we can feel well in this world with ourselves and the others.
If you become a saint you will also reach the goal of personal development but you must be “violent” to yourself and to the old you.
Many mormons feel well.
But many atheists too.
And many satanists too.
We cannot detect truth related as people feel.
Truth is not a dressing to make the salad of your old life more tasty.
I think this is just a devil suggestion.
N
NewSeeker
Guest
I am also a former Mormon. I never could reconcile the LDS priesthood ban placed on men of African ancestry with the truth that God is love and is no respecter of persons. The clear problems with the Book of Abraham, which demonstrate that it is an obvious fraud, were the final nail in the coffin of my former belief. My wife and sons are also still in the LDS Church. I long for them to discover the true face of Christ in the Catholic Church, as I did. The video is not confrontational or demeaning; it merely presents the facts. I’m going to ask my wife to view this and see what happens, if nothing else to help her understand why I do not accept the Book of Abraham to be valid scripture.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
Mir,
I am not a Mormon, here is why…the video…I suppose this would be difficult to accept by anyone. It did cause me to think is this the reason absent anything else that someone could not be Mormon?
I also had to reflect on one man who decieved people into thinking what is now a large movement of people under bondage to this thought process…Mormonism.
This gives cause to pause and understand how thoughts created bondage in peoples lives and how powerful thoughts and allegiance to those thoughts are. It is just a thought!!!
J
Jerusha
Guest
Like he said at the end, the refutation of the BoM is more difficult, because an angel took the plates away. However, it is possible, just more complicated.
And, of course LDS teachings (I do not call it theology) are constantly changing because they claim to have a living prophet whose words supersede what was said before. Those teachings are in contradiction to what we see in the NT.
Mormon apologists are scrambling to provide a coherent refutation to the facts presented in the video. One of those refutations is that the papyri were only a catalyst to the “truths” of the Book of Abraham, even though JS claimed that he produced a translation.
And, of course LDS teachings (I do not call it theology) are constantly changing because they claim to have a living prophet whose words supersede what was said before. Those teachings are in contradiction to what we see in the NT.
Mormon apologists are scrambling to provide a coherent refutation to the facts presented in the video. One of those refutations is that the papyri were only a catalyst to the “truths” of the Book of Abraham, even though JS claimed that he produced a translation.
N
NewSeeker
Guest
What was doctrinal 25 years ago in Mormonism is now just opinion; what is doctrinal today will become opinion in the future, as Mormonism - as always - continues to adjust to the vagaries of societal developments.
J
Jerusha
Guest
One of the problems with Mormonism is the social structure of LDS communities. People miss that intense socialization and sense of community. Many who leave LDS end up losing family, friends, jobs, and reputation. LDS, in order to maintain their status in the community, are required to not associate with those who reject the LDS church. There is a stereotype that those who leave the LDS religion do so because they want to sin. However, there is a lot of difference between jackMormons who do not live the religion but still accept its teachings, and exMormons, who generally leave BECAUSE of conscience.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
Jer,
What you are saying here is what is evident in Protestant thought in general a scramble to rewrite history, ie Ancient Church, Midieval Church, Modern Church as if they are different entities or the notion that “The Church” recognized the canon without describing or suggesting that this Church does not exist today. Revisionist History is part of Protestant thinking. The spin, the spin…
J
Jerusha
Guest
Sometimes I err in being too gentle.The spin, the spin…
K
Kouyate42
Guest
I would also ask as to whether Abraham knew Demotic hieroglyphics at all. I doubt it.One thing that (I think) was not mentioned in the video:
Joseph Smith claimed (and the foreword to the Book of Abraham says) that it is “written by his [Abraham’s] own hand upon the parchment”.
But…
Abraham lived somewhere around 1,800 BC, but the parchment has been carbon-dated to around 230 BC. So Abraham could not possibly have written upon a piece of parchment that did not exist until 1,600 years after he lived. The margin of error for modern carbon dating is ± 50 years.
Just one more thing that Joseph got totally wrong.
Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)
J
Jerusha
Guest
They were a later development. They did not exist when he was alive.
J
Jerusha
Guest
Bump for those who have not checked in recently.
J
Jerusha
Guest
And again.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
This video needs to been seen. Thanks for bumping
- Status