Is it possible that instead of seeing God the Father and Jesus that Joseph Smith saw demons or hallucinated?

[pablope]

Well, you have to liken the word “spirit” to “person” to get to your interpretation of John. John wrote:

Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God

 

[tortdog]

And I think you answered the fruit of the vision. Why would God order the establishment of another Church, unless it was to undermine the previous Church established by His Son?

Maybe because no church claiming to be of Christ was in keeping with God’s doctrine, and they were so far gone that God had to start afresh without taint from prior generations.

If Satan did this, as you claim, then I would not expect to see good fruits from that church.

 

[JHow]

I think it’s harder than you suggest. Give me an example where you have 12 men who claimed to have seen angels and heard the voice of the Lord, who never went back on their testimonies and lived their entire lives in that lie.

The proper example is not to find people in the exact same situation as Smith and company, but to test the limits of your proposition that we can tell the truth of a situation by observing that people cannot sustain a lie their whole life. You put it this way:

…easily find is the lie falling apart because someone decided it was not worth upholding a lie his whole life.

I had in mind a guy like Alger Hiss - insisting to the end that he was not a spy and believed by many, despite evidence to the contrary, conviction, and ultimate confirmation that in the Venona papers. He absolutely was lying, yet he never re-canted, and you may find people today who will still resist the obvious conclusion (watch if we don’t get some left-wing posters who will quibble on this example).

Of course that doesn’t “prove” anything. You might just find people who are REALLY stubborn liars. But I don’t think it’s as common as you suggest. I cannot think of an example. Not one.

Thank you for admitting that life-long insistence on the same story doesn’t demonstrate whether it is true or not - despite your putting the word “proof” in scare quotes. We cannot determine whether what Smith and company said was true based on the observation that they believed it all their lives.

 

[tortdog]

The Hiss example is one of a person lying alone. Period. It’s hardly akin to a man who lies, invites others to the party to lie with him, and they all continue in those lies together despite disagreements that result in excommunications from the “church of lies”.

I mean, if it was all a lie, why wouldn’t the guy who gets kicked out of the church admit the lie to others? What does he have to lose at that point?

In the end, it is still not “proof” (not meant to “scare” but only to not assert to strongly a final edict). It’s merely an observation that what is claimed as common is not so.

 

[JHow]

…I mean, if it was all a lie, why wouldn’t the guy who gets kicked out of the church admit the lie to others? What does he have to lose at that point?
…

I can suggest possible motives:

1 - He doesn’t think he lied - it was your line of argument to rule out confusion, mistakes, hallucinations, etc. and leave us with only “truth” or “lie”
2 - Admitting he lied will damage his reputation, which he might wish to preserve for other schemes - there is a great difference between “rival” and “enemy”

 

[JHow]

The Hiss example is one of a person lying alone…

Actually, the Hiss example was of a whole political movement telling the same lie for many years.

 

[Lapey]

Maybe because no church claiming to be of Christ was in keeping with God’s doctrine, and they were so far gone that God had to start afresh without taint from prior generations.

If Satan did this, as you claim, then I would not expect to see good fruits from that church.

It is untruthfull to look only at the good…Jesus came to establish one Church, not this or “that” one. To split HIs Church and work against the Church He established on the Rock is not good fruit.

If you ask the right people there can be found good fruit in something as evil and satan led as abortion. Can this prove abortion is God sent?

 

[Lapey]

Well, that would make sense. Why would a spirit of God deny that Christ is God?

A spirit of God would not deny that Christ is God, that’s not the question we ask about you use of these verses to back up your tradition. What keeps a spirit of satan or satan himself from professing Jesus is Lord even though he doesn’t believe it to be so, surely not this passage in it’s proper context nor does any other to my knowledge.

The Scripture talks about wolves in sheeps clothing and false prophets in many places, how do you come to your conclusion by this one verse in 1 John?

 

[Lapey]

Well, you have to liken the word “spirit” to “person” to get to your interpretation of John. John wrote:

Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God

No, sorry, he asked a spirit in a vision that the Morman Church says was God which Church to join. Big difference.

 

[pablope]

Maybe because no church claiming to be of Christ was in keeping with God’s doctrine, and they were so far gone that God had to start afresh without taint from prior generations.

 

[Holly3278]

I just want my LDS friends on here to know that I did not create this thread to offend but simply to question LDS doctrine.

 

[tortdog]

If this were true, then you are making God asleep at the wheel for 1800 years, He is a liar for promising His Holy Spirit failing to guide His Church, and letting the gates of hell to prevail, thereby letting Him undo what His Son did and died on the cross for as nothing of value.

That does not make God a liar. It fulfills prophecy that there will first be a falling away before the return of Christ. Hell does not prevail against the Church. The Church fell from within, and God ultimately conquer.

Do you really think that we do not consider this, and read the Bible too? It is possible to disagree without labeling the other ignorant of the Bible.

The fruits of the vision is what that church is doing to undermine the one true Church, in leading those away from His one true church.

If it is the true chuch. That’s a big if. I could go through the acts of the church in the early centuries, the horrors perpetrated by it in the name of Christ and I think we might both agree that it’s reasonable for a person to have some doubts that this church was “true” to Christ. I don’t want to do that. That’s not why I am here. But let’s not pretend that these horrific acts didn’t ever happen.

 

[tortdog]

I just want my LDS friends on here to know that I did not create this thread to offend but simply to question LDS doctrine.

I didn’t read it that way at all. It is a legitimate question.

 

[Link0126]

This answers Holly’s question. You conclude that the angels were really from Satan. If these angels were from Satan, how could they appear and proclaim that Christ is the Lord, the Only Begotten of the Father?

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God – 1 John 4:2–3

When Jesus was exorcising demons from people one of the demons said “we know who you are, you are the Son of God” [paraphrasing that b/c I’m not reading the verse right now]

 

[tortdog]

When Jesus was exorcising demons from people one of the demons said “we know who you are, you are the Son of God” [paraphrasing that b/c I’m not reading the verse right now]

I don’t think that’s quite accurate. Nothing in scripture says that Christ was going around and exorcizing demons. Rather, Christ left the boat and was immediately confronted by a man possessed by Satan’s spirits who recognized Christ and asked to not be tormented. He did not “testify” to Christ who he was. Christ did not need that informatiion. Christ knew who he, himself, was. So I don’t see how John was addressing that situation.

The man’s words to Christ (not to others) was:

What have I to do with you, Jesus, you Son of the Most High God?
I adjure you by God, don’t torment me.

So again, Satan is addressing Christ, recognizing who he is. Satan is not going around testifying to men that Christ is the Son of God. A house divided itself cannot stand. It would be odd for Satan to be going around preaching Christ as the Son of God.

 

[pablope]

]That does not make God a liar. It fulfills prophecy that there will first be a falling away before the return of Christ. Hell does not prevail against the Church. The Church fell from within, and God ultimately conquer.

Then prove it and then present your proof in another thread. There was just a recent thread on this, none of the LDS who participated could provide the proof. Maybe you can.

Do you really think that we do not consider this, and read the Bible too? It is possible to disagree without labeling the other ignorant of the Bible.

Where did you get the impression I was saying this?

If it is the true chuch. That’s a big if. I could go through the acts of the church in the early centuries, the horrors perpetrated by it in the name of Christ and I think we might both agree that it’s reasonable for a person to have some doubts that this church was “true” to Christ. I don’t want to do that. That’s not why I am here. But let’s not pretend that these horrific acts didn’t ever happen.

So you could not say anything else, and you present a strawman to derail the discussion? What does this have to do with the Joseph Smith’s vision?

 

[tortdog]

I fell into the trap that I tried to avoid, in answering questions that go beyond the original question of the discussion.

My bad. If someone wants to continue the discussion on the other points being brought up, I’m all ears. Or point me to this thread where someone was asking for “proof” and no one offered it (though I opine that “proof” is impossible in the case of religion).

 

[campeador]

The Hiss example is one of a person lying alone. Period. It’s hardly akin to a man who lies, invites others to the party to lie with him, and they all continue in those lies together despite disagreements that result in excommunications from the “church of lies”.

I mean, if it was all a lie, why wouldn’t the guy who gets kicked out of the church admit the lie to others? What does he have to lose at that point?

In the end, it is still not “proof” (not meant to “scare” but only to not assert to strongly a final edict). It’s merely an observation that what is claimed as common is not so.

I don’t mean to jump in but this has been brought up before.

Emma Smith publicly denied knowledge of her husband’s involvement in the practice of polygamy and denied on her deathbed that the practice had ever occurred. “No such thing as polygamy, or spiritual wifery, was taught, publicly or privately, before my husband’s death, that I have now, or ever had any knowledge of…He had no other wife but me; nor did he to my knowledge ever have.”

wiki link​

 

[Lapey]

I fell into the trap that I tried to avoid, in answering questions that go beyond the original question of the discussion.

My bad. If someone wants to continue the discussion on the other points being brought up, I’m all ears. Or point me to this thread where someone was asking for “proof” and no one offered it (though I opine that “proof” is impossible in the case of religion).

Does it feel like you’re a dog chasing your tail yet? I felt that way last week on the Liturgy and Sacrements forum…lol

 

[ParkerD]

I just want my LDS friends on here to know that I did not create this thread to offend but simply to question LDS doctrine.

Holly,

By the way, I assume that you noticed that your question about Stephen was answered without my needing to answer it. The Douay-Rheims translation was fine to use for that purpose.

Someone else asked about differing accounts by Stephen of his vision, but one notes that he was in the throes of being about to be killed, so it would not seem logical that one would find different accounts by him of his vision.

However, Paul certainly didn’t use the exact same words each time he told of his vision on the road to Damascus, even though that vision had happened just one time. He used different emphasis and different detail words for different audiences.