N
Nicea325
Guest
And your living in ignorance and denial.
- Status
E
eddie_too
Guest
joseph smith and the lds is what you get when you take tradition away from scriptual exegesis (sp?).
what is left is a totally inconsistent and erroneous understanding of sacred scripture.
that is why the lds insists on being open to new revelations. what it teaches today may be proven to be incoherent, inconsistent or erroneous with the facts, knowledge, history, logic, reason and tradition. consequently, it is incumbent upon mormons that there be a mechanism to correct what was previously taught and currently shown to be nonsense.
remember when your sole basis for believing something is a warm feeling in your body, you are going to run into problems with facts and consistency.
what is left is a totally inconsistent and erroneous understanding of sacred scripture.
that is why the lds insists on being open to new revelations. what it teaches today may be proven to be incoherent, inconsistent or erroneous with the facts, knowledge, history, logic, reason and tradition. consequently, it is incumbent upon mormons that there be a mechanism to correct what was previously taught and currently shown to be nonsense.
remember when your sole basis for believing something is a warm feeling in your body, you are going to run into problems with facts and consistency.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Nice divergence. Do you know how foolish you sound? You are claiming it is FALSE and yet are asking those you believe in the to prove it? Hello! What you are saying basically is this:
I know the RP is false because I have ancient primary sources proving it is false.
Well if you are claiming the early church never taught it or believed, then it is very evident you have overwhelming evidence to support your argument.
Well…fork over those primary sources.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Boy…boy under what rock did you crawl out of? You cannot prove a negative? Excuse me, but you most certainly can prove the Real Presence is false, if you are claiming it is false. And how? By providing those overwhelming primary sources from the early chruch. They are called written documents. It is not a secret.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Truth is not mocking. Please check the definition before using a word.
Baring your testimony constantly instead of providing facts for your assertions can be considered not only proseltyzing, but evasion.
You make all sorts of assertions, then claim you can’t prove the negative. Ever heard of “put up, or shut up?” I think that may apply here.
If you don’t start engaging in honest dialogue, no one will take what you say seriously. (assuming anyone does now)
Just some more friendly advice for you.
E
eddie_too
Guest
jsut to help mathanihah out,
you do not have to prove a negative. simply prove that the Church founded by Jesus and led by the apostles did teach that the bread and wine consecrated by the priest using the same words used by Christ was only symbolic. prove that they taught that the bread and wine was not the Real presence.
we are not asking anyone to prove a negative. we want proof of what Jesus and His Church actually taught.
mathonihah, you are saying that the taught that the consecrated bread and wine were solely symbolic. what is your evidence for making such a POSITIVE declaration? surely history would have evidence that your POSITIVE declaration lost out to the Real Presence doctrine.
otherwise, you are asking people to change their beliefs from one declaration to another without any evidence to support the second.
there are a multitude of documents that demonstrate that the doctrine of the Real Presence was taught from the beginning of the Church. there is no evidence demostrating that the early Church considered the consecrated bread and wine to be mere symbols.
you do not have to prove a negative. simply prove that the Church founded by Jesus and led by the apostles did teach that the bread and wine consecrated by the priest using the same words used by Christ was only symbolic. prove that they taught that the bread and wine was not the Real presence.
we are not asking anyone to prove a negative. we want proof of what Jesus and His Church actually taught.
mathonihah, you are saying that the taught that the consecrated bread and wine were solely symbolic. what is your evidence for making such a POSITIVE declaration? surely history would have evidence that your POSITIVE declaration lost out to the Real Presence doctrine.
otherwise, you are asking people to change their beliefs from one declaration to another without any evidence to support the second.
there are a multitude of documents that demonstrate that the doctrine of the Real Presence was taught from the beginning of the Church. there is no evidence demostrating that the early Church considered the consecrated bread and wine to be mere symbols.
P
pablope
Guest
Hmmm…the burning in the bosom is just a start…but should move you to act like St. Paul, will not contradict the example of St. Paul in what the revelation or the burning in the bosom that St. Paul felt:
Galatians 2:2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain.
The burning in the bosom of St. Paul is not to go out on his own…not to make claims of his own…but to seek and submit to authority of the Apostles.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
But I thought ALL that was needed was a just a good feeling…that is what Mormon prophets and teachers assured me…
T
TheIrishman
Guest
This is another reason why i’m leaving the LDS church. All I asked for were sources to back up Math’s claim on RP and he becomes silent. This is a classic member, when you ask an honest question about their teaching, the don’t really provide any scripture or documents to back it up. Just “believe” it because you have a burning in your bosom or because the prophet says it’s true. I’m now reminded of that musical titled “book of mormon” and the song called “A mormon just believes!”
P
pablope
Guest
Hmm…but who assured them their teachings in the first place?
from 1John 4…4 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world…
How do we know who is false and who is not?
6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
That is amazing…you mean the Bible shows that a simple good feeling is not good enough to determine truth?Hmm…but who assured them their teachings in the first place?
from 1John 4…4 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world…
How do we know who is false and who is not?
6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
C
CyndiTo411
Guest
:console: and the truth shall set you free 
N
Nicea325
Guest
Exactly! If Math’s claims are concrete facts and truths like the early church never believing or taeaching the RP, then it is amazing how it has to be proved or supported with legit sources.
Here I’ll get to the point- IT IS A LIE WHICH CANNOT BE PROVED AS TRUTH!
The Truth is ALWAYS defended with sound sources (i.e., Real Presence).
T
TexanKnight
Guest
Here is a summary of Math’s Responses:Exactly! If Math’s claims are concrete facts and truths like the early church never believing or taeaching the RP, then it is amazing how it has to be proved or supported with legit sources.
Here I’ll get to the point- IT IS A LIE WHICH CANNOT BE PROVED AS TRUTH!
The Truth is ALWAYS defended with sound sources (i.e., Real Presence).
Us: There are contradictions in the First Vision Versions
Math: Prove it.
Us: Ok, here they are.
Math: I read them and there are no contradictions
Us: But, there are. Different ages, different people present, different things said
Math: Oh yeah? Well, there are contradictions in the Bible.
Us: Really? Prove it.
Math: um…no.
Us: Why be LDS?
Math: because I had a good feeling.
Us: But so did others…wht makes you sure your feeling was correct?
Math:" the Holy Ghost said so
Us: How do you know it was the Holy Spirit?
Math: Because I had a good feeling.
Us: Well, that clears it up
N
Nicea325
Guest
:tiphat: So in other words, Math’s entire arguments are based on “good feelings” is why I am right and you are all wrong.
I too have been having a “good feelings” about winning the Jackpot for years now, but it does not mean I am going to win it based on “good feelings.” What foolishness!
P
pablope
Guest
Well…
Isn’t this what 1Jjohn 4 is basically saying…do not trust only your feelings…for you could be deceived…as even the Bible warns that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light…and in one’s excitement, seeing an angel, or personages of the Divine…one’s mind and eyes could be clouded with emotions…and thus get deceived…
P
pablope
Guest
Just a thought…from my musings…and since you are a former mormon…what are your thoughts on this (same goes with former and current mormons):
The events and prophesies of Fatima…where the end of WW I and another more devastating war was warned with turned out to be WW II…and the message of Fatima…to pray, turn away from sin, etc…so here is what I cannot wrap my mind around:
If the Catholic Church is the apostate church, and the LDS the restored true church…why were the prophesies at Fatima, and the message of Fatima…given through the CC and not through the LDS?
I mean, if the LDS is truly the “Church” of Christ…should it not be the one proclaiming and announcing the message of Fatima, and through the LDS, the prophesy of the end of WW I and start of WW II been the conduit these were let known to the world?
And also, Portugal was almost becoming communist at the time of the apparition of Fatima…so why, after the apparition, it retained its Catholic faith…and it did not become or the whole nation convert to the restored church…the LDS?
Could you help my mind with this?
T
TexanKnight
Guest
When I was LDS, I was taught the Marian visits were from Satan.Just a thought…from my musings…and since you are a former mormon…what are your thoughts on this (same goes with former and current mormons):
The events and prophesies of Fatima…where the end of WW I and another more devastating war was warned with turned out to be WW II…and the message of Fatima…to pray, turn away from sin, etc…so here is what I cannot wrap my mind around:
If the Catholic Church is the apostate church, and the LDS the restored true church…why were the prophesies at Fatima, and the message of Fatima…given through the CC and not through the LDS?
I mean, if the LDS is truly the “Church” of Christ…should it not be the one proclaiming and announcing the message of Fatima, and through the LDS, the prophesy of the end of WW I and start of WW II been the conduit these were let known to the world?
And also, Portugal was almost becoming communist at the time of the apparition of Fatima…so why, after the apparition, it retained its Catholic faith…and it did not become or the whole nation convert to the restored church…the LDS?
Could you help my mind with this?
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
I never heard of Fatima until I was in RCIA. The Miracle of the Sun was a HUGE discovery for me. Very influential to my views on supernatural events.
There is a Catholic school here named after St. Juan Diego. I had no idea who he was until I googled him, out of curiosity, also when I was in RCIA.
Utah is isolated from Catholicism. The only thing I knew about Catholicism before embarking on “discovering” it, was 1) there is a Pope and 2) Rome is in Italy and 3) The Godfather films were about Catholics.
There is a Catholic school here named after St. Juan Diego. I had no idea who he was until I googled him, out of curiosity, also when I was in RCIA.
Utah is isolated from Catholicism. The only thing I knew about Catholicism before embarking on “discovering” it, was 1) there is a Pope and 2) Rome is in Italy and 3) The Godfather films were about Catholics.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Was it a “burning in the bosom”, or and IRS threat that caused the change regarding blacks and the priesthood/
Was it a “burning in the bosom”, or getting caught with his pants down (literally) that caused the revelation on polygamy?
Was it a “burning in the bosom”, or abuse of power and violation of the Constitution that caused the Expositor press to be destroyed?
Anyone seeing a pattern here?
- Status