J
JonathanKinsman
Guest
please prove Mormon pantheology.
please prove BoM “fulfills” the Bible.
please prove Joe Smith is a “prophet.”
please prove Eternal Progression.
please prove the Curse of Cain.
any others, wassup?
- Status
please prove BoM “fulfills” the Bible.
please prove Joe Smith is a “prophet.”
please prove Eternal Progression.
please prove the Curse of Cain.
any others, wassup?
J
JonathanKinsman
Guest
Okay, wademann, you opened your mouth, now remove your foot and give some SPECIFIC examples that the Catholic Church HAS NOT believed “the exact same thing” in matters of scripture and doctrine?
[deafening silence]
Q: How many times have Mormon doctrines changed in the last 170+ years?
A: As fast as we can before our members discover what we ‘officially’ believe!
M
mochi
Guest
D
dbacks5439
Guest
The primary belief that I think debunks the entire “cult” IMO is the doctrine of polygamy. If Joseph Smith claims to re-establish the Church that apostasized, why is it that he established this doctrine and later that doctrine was erased? Jesus never talked a word about polygamy other than to rebuke it. To me, Joseph Smith created the LDS as a way to satisfy his conscience in order to pursue more than one wife. This changing of doctrine has me to believe that LDS is not the continuation of the true Church because the true doctrines would already be in place, and no change is required.
J
JonathanKinsman
Guest
BINGO !
dbacks:
This is THE CRUX of the whole Mormon lie: why do they change what they believe if they claim to be the “restoration” of the one, true church?
Every Mormon’s answer on this site:
[silence]
Pax Christi
A
Allweather
Guest
I agree about polygamy being THE major fly in the Mormon soup. From every which direction, polygamy is a big problem for the Mormons. It is arguably the most significant factor leading to Joseph Smith’s killing. It was the major stumbling block (along with the theocracy that the Mormons had going in Utah) to acceptance of Mormons by the rest of the country, and Utah statehood, which took FIFTY YEARS to get through Congress.
Nowadays, when most Americans think Mormon, the first word associated with that thought is “polygamy.” The media keep this idea going with frequent programs about break-a-way Mormon sects that still practice polygamy, and reports on the FLDS whose so-called prophet languishes in prison on child abuse charges related to his polygamous teachings.
When it comes to witnessing Christ to Mormons, I think the best way to approach a Mormon woman, or a woman considering becoming a Mormon, is to talk polygamy. Get the history of it, and show them how Joseph Smith practiced it, lied about it, and was killed because of it, how Brigham Young had 50-some wives, how it is still a doctrine that is alive, and that the only reason Mormon men aren’t marrying multiple gals today is because of federal and state laws against it.
P
Pjs2ejs
Guest
Hey WUSSUP,
I only had to look as far as Wikipedia to find these verses. They are from a book we Christians like to call the Bible. Not sure if you have read it. Enjoy
Genesis 1:1-2 - 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Proverbs 8:22-24 - 22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Psalm 33:6 - 6By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
John 1:3 - 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Romans 4:17 - even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
1 Corinthians 1:28 - 28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
Hebrews 11:3 - 3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
I only had to look as far as Wikipedia to find these verses. They are from a book we Christians like to call the Bible. Not sure if you have read it. Enjoy
Genesis 1:1-2 - 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Proverbs 8:22-24 - 22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Psalm 33:6 - 6By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
John 1:3 - 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Romans 4:17 - even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
1 Corinthians 1:28 - 28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
Hebrews 11:3 - 3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
A
August
Guest
Doesn’t the Mormon creed say the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly? Can’t Mormons just say that these verses were translated incorectly?
Z
zerinus
Guest
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
The problem here is that the Bible doesnt indicate God as having a human body. It uses human terms as a description (eg God holds all things in His “hand”) but its a mistake to claim since God is addressed as “He” it must mean He is male. No time does God give the impression He has a human body, thats why He speaks from clouds and objects. A human is a creation of God, as Gen 2:21-24 it is clear the female is subject to the male, that is why God is not referenced as a “she.” Yet Eve was created in God’s image, that goes against the notion that God is male. The male and female “parts” are used for human multiplication as the passage says, this is not needed for God, He creates apart from sexual reproduction.
Thats ONLY because Jesus was born a male from a human mother. The Bible is clear for example from Phil 2: 5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
This passage give no indication the Father has a human male body…on the contrary it is clear the Son, Jesus, TOOK ON a human male body…something unheard of and unfathomable.
That example dosent work because calling the unborn “it” is due to our human limitations of not knowing the “details” but all the while recognizing the child is a person. God on the otherhand revealed Himself in a personal manner we could relate to in order to better help us understand Him who our finite minds cant fully grasp.
In regards to that verse your analysis says “man = him = them (male and female)” inserting that into the verse it can correctly read:So God created them (male and female) in his own image, in the image of God he created them (male and female); male and female he created them (male and female).
This does not support your claims at all (ie that this verse means God is male), infact it goes directly against them. God created “them (male and female)” in “his own image” either means God is both male and female or that “God’s image” is in reference to soul/spirit.
Your “Therefore” is not supported at all, it is pure assumption and unwarranted at that. Im not even sure why you highlighted “his” considering you never referenced it in any of the “equations.”
(cont)
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
(cont 2 of 2)
Considering the great ramifications of the Bible being corrupted by not making this clear and calling it simply “interpreted/translated incorrect” as their Articles of Faith put it is simply misleading.
This is unfounded, God is not “used in a generic sense”…God is referenced in a personal sense as “He” and He is doing the creating. There is no reference to a female helping out. Further the distinction of male and female was a new concept, it was a creation (Gen 2:22) and this destinction was the means by which humans would propogate (v24). That isnt how God propogates and a “female” god would imply such a thing as well as other unBiblical notions.
I consider this unsubstantiated unless you produce the evidence (quotes from the ECFs with valid links, see ccel.com or newadvent.com for their writings). Futher, should the evidence be presented and found unwarranted, I expect you to seriously reconsider you claims against ex nihilo.
I dont follow, how can you say its a “fact” there is no such thing as abesnce of time? As for absence of “being” that depends on what you mean, if your talking about it is impossible for there not to have been atoms/matter then I would disagree.
Thats debatable and depends on the verses at hand. I used to think LDS stood on the ground that the Bible was inerrant and they only obejected to it not being “interpreted/translated correctly”…I later found out on their own offical page they say the Bible has been corrupted, and in the past I have had lds online “refute” my claims on the ground the Bible was “corrupted.”
Considering the great ramifications of the Bible being corrupted by not making this clear and calling it simply “interpreted/translated incorrect” as their Articles of Faith put it is simply misleading.
A
adrift
Guest
This would be an incorrect use of the English language brought about by radical feminism.
In the English language, when the sex is unknown, the proper usage is the pronoun he, never it.
Z
zerinus
Guest
You have wasted a lot of your time and spent too many words to tell me very little. The Bible shows that God has appeared in numerous instances to man in the past as a real, physical, corporeal MAN, with all the physical attributes of a man. Even one instance would be sufficient to refute all your claims, and put paid to all your arguments; but there is more than one instance recorded in the Bible. Here are some that readily comes to my mind. There may be more that I can’t think of offhand.
God appeared to Abraham as a man, he eat and drank with Him, and talk with and even remonstrated with Him as a man:
Genesis 18:
1 And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
Of these three “men,” two of them were the two angels that later separated form the group, and went to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, and saved Lot from the destruction. The remaining person was God! Read the rest of the chapter to find out more.
Jacob likewise saw God as a physical man, and even wrestled with him as he would with a normal human being:
Genesis 32:
24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
Moses and the elders of Israel saw God as a man:
Exodus 24:
9 Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:
10 And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
The OT tells us more about the intimate nature of Moses’ encounters with God. After Aaron and Miriam had spoken against Moses disrespectfully because he had married an Ethiopian woman, the Lord chastened them with these words:
Numbers 12:
6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently {i.e. visibly}, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?
By the “similitude of the Lord” is meant the very shape, form, and appearance of God. Isaiah likewise saw God as a man in physical form:
Isaiah 6:
1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
“His train” refers to the hem of His garments. In other words, God was dressed in regal attire, as a king would.
Matthew 5:8 tells us that “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God;” and in Acts 7:56 we see an example of this: “. . . Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. And in 1 John 3:2 we read that when God “shall appear,” we shall “see him as he is.”
There is no better way of determining the physical attributes of God and His “gender” than by actually physically seeing Him. Well, as it turns out, lots of people have; and His physical attributes have never been anything other than that of a male human being. It has never been female, and it has never been anything other than a man.
zerinus
A
adrift
Guest
Z
zerinus
Guest
All that this proves is that the Bible appears to contradict itself. Some passages of the Bible say that God can be seen and indeed has been seen, and other passages seem to be saying that He can’t be! Well, I will stick with the ones which says He can be!—not least because they include eyewitness accounts that He indeed has been.
zerinus
H
hosemonkey
Guest
Zerinus,
False prophet, false religion, false BoM, false theology,faulty history. You have been duped. Face it.
False prophet, false religion, false BoM, false theology,faulty history. You have been duped. Face it.
Z
zerinus
Guest
H
hosemonkey
Guest
That’s me, always going around pulling the foolish monkey’s tails.
Z
zerinus
Guest
A lot of people don’t appreciate the joke, me included.That’s me, always going around pulling the foolish monkey’s tails.
zerinus
H
hosemonkey
Guest
You’ll get over it.
- Status