Why would anyone want to be a Mormon or Jehovah Witnesses? Part 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter kimg901
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mathonihah said:
Two answers to that. The first was already given: if you think that is how that verse should be translated, where is the contradiction with the Articles of Faith that you would like me to explain?

The second answer is, here are some alternate translations of that verse:

New International Version
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation."

New Living Translation
I lavish unfailing love to a thousand generations. I forgive iniquity, rebellion, and sin. But I do not excuse the guilty. I lay the sins of the parents upon their children and grandchildren; the entire family is affected–even children in the third and fourth generations."

English Standard Version
keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”

New American Standard Bible
who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations."

King James Bible
Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
maintaining faithful love to a thousand generations, forgiving wrongdoing, rebellion, and sin. But He will not leave the guilty unpunished, bringing the consequences of the fathers’ wrongdoing on the children and grandchildren to the third and fourth generation.

International Standard Version
He graciously loves thousands, and forgives iniquity, transgression, and sin. But he does not leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of the ancestors on their children, and on their children’s children to the third and fourth generation."

NET Bible
keeping loyal love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. But he by no means leaves the guilty unpunished, responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children and children’s children, to the third and fourth generation."

GOD’S WORD
He continues to show his love to thousands of generations, forgiving wrongdoing, disobedience, and sin. He never lets the guilty go unpunished, punishing children and grandchildren for their parents’ sins to the third and fourth generation."

King James 2000 Bible
Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

American King James Version
Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the children’s children, to the third and to the fourth generation.

American Standard Version
keeping lovingkindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty , visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.

Darby Bible Translation
keeping mercy unto thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but by no means clearing the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.

English Revised Version
keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin: and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.

Webster’s Bible Translation
Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, to the third and to the fourth generation.

World English Bible
keeping loving kindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and disobedience and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the children’s children, on the third and on the fourth generation."

Young’s Literal Translation
keeping kindness for thousands, taking away iniquity, and transgression, and sin, and not entirely acquitting, charging iniquity of fathers on children, and on children’s children, on a third generation, and on a fourth.’

I think the majority translation backs the KJV.
Click to expand...
And… You still have not answered the question. Answer it based upon any translation you wish to use. Fair enough?
 
RebeccaJ said:
I didn’t think so. Perhaps you don’t know salvation history? In context vs 6&7 are when Moses received the law and God made a covenant with His people. This prefigured Christ who fulfills the law and has made a a New Covenant with his people. “His people” broadened from the Hebrews to all mankind. SteveVH also gave you the context of Salvation History.

St. Paul taught in his letter to the Romans, chapter 4:

8 But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us.
9 How much more then, since we are now justified by his blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath.
10 Indeed, if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, how much more, once reconciled, will we be saved by his life.
11 Not only that, but we also boast of God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

In addition, I get the idea,from your posts that you don’t understand when there was no law, sin was not accounted for. For example, when you point to practices before Moses, and apply to them the Mosaic laws. St. Paul says int the same letter, same chapter:

13 for up to the time of the law, sin was in the world, though sin is not accounted when there is no law.
14 But death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin after the pattern of the trespass of Adam, who is the type of the one who was to come.

The law both brought accountability for sin and a means to bring the Hebrews to be reconciled with God. In Christ, the law is fulfilled. We are reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, not by obedience to the Mitzvah.

We are saved by grace, reconciled to God by the free gift of His Son. The Hebrews did not know this gift, as the full Word of God, Jesus Christ, had not yet been revealed. As Christians, we are hearers and doers of the Word, which doesn’t mean we are hearers and doers of the law.

St. Paul continues, in chapter 5:

Freedom from Sin; Life in God.
1 What then shall we say? Shall we persist in sin that grace may abound? Of course not!
2 How can we who died to sin yet live in it?
3 Or are you unaware that we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
4 We were indeed buried with him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live in newness of life.
5 For if we have grown into union with him through a death like his, we shall also be united with him in the resurrection.
6 We know that our old self was crucified with him, so that our sinful body might be done away with, that we might no longer be in slavery to sin.
7 For a dead person has been absolved from sin.
8 If, then, we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him.
9 We know that Christ, raised from the dead, dies no more; death no longer has power over him.
10 As to his death, he died to sin once and for all; as to his life, he lives for God.
11 Consequently, you too must think of yourselves as [being] dead to sin and living for God in Christ Jesus.
12 Therefore, sin must not reign over your mortal bodies so that you obey their desires.k
13 And do not present the parts of your bodies to sin as weapons for wickedness, but present yourselves to God as raised from the dead to life and the parts of your bodies to God as weapons for righteousness.
14 For sin is not to have any power over you, since you are not under the law but under grace.

We are reconciled to God. Our God is not a puny god, a trickster, who Saves us one moment and then curses us and all our generations the next. Christ died for all. This means you,me, and all the generations of mankind. Jesus Christ is the evidence of God’s love and Mercy. He is where we abide. Not Joseph Smith or any other sinful man.
Click to expand...
Still an evasive answer. No idea what relevance that has to Exodus 34:6–7.

BTW, that sounds a awful lot like the thinking of an evangelical Protestant. Are you sure you in the right place? See you at CARM next! 😃
 
mathonihah said:
Waiting in vain. Show me one NT verse from Jesus disapproving of polygamy.
Click to expand...
that is your answer? You do not have one so you ask one?

Come on, little fella…

I asked you a ling time ago…waiting for your answer
 
SteveVH said:
I am speaking of original sin. Sin being passed on to generations.
Click to expand...
I call that changing the subject to get out of a right spot.
Correct me if I’m wrong but you do not believe in original sin or infant Baptism because the child could not be stained with sin unless he committed the sin himself. Yet the scriptures tell us that sin can indeed be passed on to generations. That is why we enter into “covenant” with God and receive his mercy in Baptism, just as an eight day old infant was circumcised in order to enter into covenant after Abraham.
Click to expand...
Okay, you have changed the subject, but I will play along. Mormonism believes in a version of Original Sin which says that as a result of the sin of Adam mankind are fallen, and become subject to the power of the devil, and have acquired a disposition to commit sin. But it does not say that man become guilty because of the Original Sin. Man becomes guilty because of his own sins, not the sin of Adsm
I will ask once again. Will you respond to the question? Agree or disagree, we still have not heard your take on this. Why do you keep avoiding the question?
Click to expand...
What is your question now? I have no idea what the question is, now that you have changed the subject
 
Ya’ll think polygamy is bad? This could be even more painful. So, what happens when a young man is in love and his lady is wanted by a higher up in the Mormon church?

20truths.info/mormon/blood.html

"In Utah it has been the custom with the Priesthood to make eunuchs of such men as were obnoxious to the leaders. This was done for a double purpose: first, it gave a perfect revenge, and next, it left the poor victim a living example to others of the dangers of disobeying counsel and not living as ordered by the Priesthood.

"In Nauvoo it was the orders from Joseph Smith and his apostles to beat, wound and castrate all Gentiles that the police could take in the act of entering or leaving a Mormon household under circumstances that led to the belief that they had been there for immoral purposes…In Utah it was the favorite revenge of old, worn-out members of the Priesthood, who wanted young women sealed to them, and found that the girl preferred some handsome young man. The old priests generally got the girls, and many a young man was unsexed for refusing to give up his sweetheart at the request of an old and failing, but still sensual apostle or member of the Priesthood.

As an illustration…Warren Snow was Bishop of the Church at Manti, San Pete County, Utah. He had several wives, but there was a fair, buxom young woman in the town that Snow wanted for a wife…She thanked him for the honor offered, but told him she was then engaged to a young man, a member of the Church, and consequently could not marry the old priest…He told her it was the will of God that she should marry him, and she must do so; that the young man could be got rid of, sent on a mission or dealt with in some way…that, in fact, a promise made to the young man was not binding, when she was informed that it was contrary to the wishes of the authorities.

"The girl continued obstinate…the authorities called on the young man and directed him to give up the young woman. This he steadfastly refused to do…He remained true to his intended, and said he would die before he would surrender his intended wife to the embraces of another…The young man was ordered to go on a mission to some distant locality…But the mission was refused…

"It was then determined that the rebellious young man must be forced by harsh treatment to respect the advice and orders of the Priesthood. His fate was left to Bishop Snow for his decision. He decided that the young man should be castrated; Snow saying, ‘When that is done, he will not be liable to want the girl badly, and she will listen to reason when she knows that her lover is no longer a man.’
 
SteveVH said:
And… You still have not answered the question. Answer it based upon any translation you wish to use. Fair enough?
Click to expand...
In that case then, let us agree on a translation first. Pick a translation we can both agree upon, or one that you like best, and we will take it from there.
 
Since you reject jesus and his teaching in Mark, how about Paul?

So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. (Rom 7)
 
mathonihah said:
In that case then, let us agree on a translation first. Pick a translation we can both agree upon, and we will take it from there.
Click to expand...
Why? Mormons invent their own definitions for words no matter what translation is used.

You know that Z. You’ve slipped since you were here last.
 
TexanKnight said:
Since you reject jesus and his teaching in Mark, how about Paul?

So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. (Rom 7)
Click to expand...
Of course Math rejects Jesus. Correct if I am wrong, since you are an ex-Mormon,but don’t Mormons place Joey above Jesus? So I have been told by former LDS disciples?
 
mathonihah said:
Waiting in vain. Show me one NT verse from Jesus disapproving of polygamy.
Click to expand...
What is the famous answer that every mormon uses?

Come on, say it with me…“You can’t prove a negative.”

You can do better.
 
twopekinguys said:
Why? Mormons invent their own definitions for words no matter what translation is used.

You know that Z. You’ve slipped since you were here last.
Click to expand...
What do Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses have in common? They are NOTORIOUS for re-inventing and re-defining words in order to justify their wacky beliefs.
 
twopekinguys said:
What is the famous answer that every mormon uses?

Come on, say it with me…“You can’t prove a negative.”

You can do better.
Click to expand...
When someone cannot answer and turns the tables around with a question, then it is obvious they have no answer and victory is pretty much in the bag!
 
Is this still a doctrine?

“[There is] “no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth…no man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God” -Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190

I’ll take the Christian Jesus, thank you very much.
 
mathonihah said:
In that case then, let us agree on a translation first. Pick a translation we can both agree upon, or one that you like best, and we will take it from there.
Click to expand...
Really? I have already stated, more than once, pick any translation you wish. That is what I have already agreed. I have already picked two translations (Catholic translations). Stop avoiding the question and just answer it based upon any translation you wish.

Can you find a credible translation that does not state that the judgment of God is visited upon generations for the sins of the father?
 
Is this still taught, or was he just speaking as a man? If so, why is it in a priesthood manual?

“If we get our salvation, we shall have to pass by Joseph Smith; if we enter our glory, it will be through the authority he has received. We cannot get around him.” -1988 Melchizedek Priesthood Study Guide, p. 142, Apostle George Q. Cannon

I’ll take the Christian Jesus, Thank you very much.
 
twopekinguys said:
Is this still a doctrine?

“[There is] “no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith. If Joseph Smith was verily a prophet, and if he told the truth…no man can reject that testimony without incurring the most dreadful consequences, for he cannot enter the kingdom of God” -Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p.190

I’ll take the Christian Jesus, thank you very much.
Click to expand...
No kidding. Who on earth believes another finite creature can save? That is false and only God alone saves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top