Here is news that may have terrible consequences for the LDS church.

[James Banta]

Before I post it I should remind all why the LDS church abandoned polygamy..

D&C Official Declaration 1
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced const itutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

Ok to the meat.. Today U.S. District Court judge for Utah has ruled that key parts of Utah’s polygamy laws are unconst itutional. As of today it is no longer illegal to "Cohabitant" with more than one person whether or not you call them your spouse, if such is done for religious reasons.. The reason for the issuance of Official Declaration 1 is over.. Since the 132nd section of the D&C of the LDS church is still in effect it is now the duty of those LDS that would please God to start living by it's commandments.. They should at least conform their minds to the idea that polygamy is God's pattern for marriage as President Brigham Young taught.. Polygamy never really ended in mormonism with the belief that a man would still be married to his first wife if she dies before he did, even though he took a seconds wife in this life.. Both were considered his wives.. Now the resistants are off. Though no second marriage certificate can be issued (that is a matter of man's law anyway), but it is fully legal to have two, three, or more wives you may marry by the law of the church.. I have been waiting for this NEWS YEAH.... IHS jim

[Ma'am]

Before I post it I should remind all why the LDS church abandoned polygamy..

D&C Official Declaration 1
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced const itutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

Ok to the meat.. Today U.S. District Court judge for Utah has ruled that key parts of Utah’s polygamy laws are unconst itutional. As of today it is no longer illegal to "Cohabitant" with more than one person whether or not you call them your spouse, if such is done for religious reasons.. The reason for the issuance of Official Declaration 1 is over.. Since the 132nd section of the D&C of the LDS church is still in effect it is now the duty of those LDS that would please God to start living by it's commandments.. They should at least conform their minds to the idea that polygamy is God's pattern for marriage as President Brigham Young taught.. Polygamy never really ended in mormonism with the belief that a man would still be married to his first wife if she dies before he did, even though he took a seconds wife in this life.. Both were considered his wives.. Now the resistants are off. Though no second marriage certificate can be issued (that is a matter of man's law anyway), but it is fully legal to have two, three, or more wives you may marry by the law of the church.. I have been waiting for this NEWS YEAH.... IHS jim

I saw that in the newspaper...I predict a LOT of people in Utah, mostly men, will suddenly become very "religious" and accumulate extra wives for themselves, all in the name of "religion."

[James Banta]

I saw that in the newspaper...I predict a LOT of people in Utah, mostly men, will suddenly become very "religious" and accumulate extra wives for themselves, all in the name of "religion."

If they don't repeal Official Declaration 1 because polygamy for religious reasons has been legalized by the US Federal Courts they are just what the FLDS teach that they are, in apostasy, and have surrendered their authority.. They will not resume polygamy because they want to be seen as a Christian church.. They want the respect of the world and really don't care about keeping the commandments of their god that may show that they are a peculiar people.. Only the FLDS church and of course it's other fundamentalist sister churches will be able to say that they are being obedient to God.. ALL of the LDS church will indeed be in apostasy for the sake of looking right to the world.. I LOVE IT.. Either way this has the potential to destroy mormonism as we know it.. IHS jim

[Apologette]

I saw that in the newspaper...I predict a LOT of people in Utah, mostly men, will suddenly become very "religious" and accumulate extra wives for themselves, all in the name of "religion."

Here is the article: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-polygamy-waddoups-ruling.html.csp

So now what Mormon men? If you can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without more than one wife, what excuse are you going to use now when you meet up with Joe Smith?

[James Banta]

Here is the article: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56894145-78/utah-polygamy-waddoups-ruling.html.csp

So now what Mormon men? If you can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without more than one wife, what excuse are you going to use now when you meet up with Joe Smith?

How can the LDS church keep both the 132nd section of the D&C and Official Declaration1 when all court ordered prohibition against living in spiritual marriages with more than one living wife, have been removed.. The Official Declaration is very specific in why it was issued.

"Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced cons***utional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise." (D&C Official Declaration1)

If the courts now in this era of "anything goes" in marriage have reversed their position to allow this filthy practice, mormonism has only two choices.
1. To remove Official Declaration1 from the D&C making plural marriage under the authority of the church again part of it's doctrine and practice, OR
2. Concede that Joseph Smith was a false prophet and set all his teaching aside and accept the Bible as all Christians do yes even that traditional Christ they have denued at every turn.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

So now what Mormon men? If you can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without more than one wife, what excuse are you going to use now when you meet up with Joe Smith?
No excuse necessary, of course, because we don't need more than one wife to get into the Celestial Kingdom.

[Apologette]

No excuse necessary, of course, because we don't need more than one wife to get into the Celestial Kingdom.

Oh, really? Then why don't you denounce Brigham Young for saying:


"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be ****ed," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).

[Apologette]

I saw that in the newspaper...I predict a LOT of people in Utah, mostly men, will suddenly become very "religious" and accumulate extra wives for themselves, all in the name of "religion."

I can hear it now, "why, we're only giving a chance to all those poor single women to marry a priesthood holder so that they can become a goddess!

[Erundur]

Oh, really? Then why don't you denounce Brigham Young for saying:
Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion.

[James Banta]

Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion.

We point to statements actually made from Young's own sermons and you deny He said these things.. Your denials have no authority other than you saying "because I say so", but that should be enough right? WRONG! You will have to prove we are misstating Young's teaching in the p***age we have quoted.. That is where Young supports our "False ***ertions. I will go as far as Young teaching that a man must be a polygamists at least in faith, if that faith is missing that man will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. That is salvation by faith, not in Jesus, but in polygamy. But that is a false ***ertion too I imagine..

BTW welcome back.. This time you should have no problem avoiding punishment for disobeying the rules. There is no enforcement.. I imagine that it is too much to ask for you to follow the rules anyway right? IHS jim

[Erundur]

We point to statements actually made from Young's own sermons and you deny He said these things..
No I don't. You're just making stuff up now, James.


BTW welcome back.. This time you should have no problem avoiding punishment for disobeying the rules. There is no enforcement.. I imagine that it is too much to ask for you to follow the rules anyway right?
BTW I've never posted here before.

[James Banta]

No I don't. You're just making stuff up now, James.


BTW I've never posted here before.

Just what do you think the Journal of Discourses are? It was a record of the sermons given by the GAs of the LDS church and sent to the membership in England. Hey I even find reference to this sermon by FAIR. Go check it out (http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_polygamy/Brigham_Young_said_that_the_only_men_who_become_go ds_are_those_that_practice_polygamy). You do know what FAIR is don't you.. Maybe I am giving you to much credit for even having a little knowledge.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

Maybe I am giving you to much credit for even having a little knowledge..
Well, let's find out how much credit I should give you. Show me where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. That should be really easy, since I now have a grand total of 4 posts.

[Apologette]

Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion.

Mormons always have to twist words, even of their own prophet, to rationalize away their meanings.

[RealFakeHair]

Well, let's find out how much credit I should give you. Show me where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. That should be really easy, since I now have a grand total of 4 posts.

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be ****ed," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).
Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion.

What the Heck?

[neverending]

Well, let's find out how much credit I should give you. Show me where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. That should be really easy, since I now have a grand total of 4 posts.

Not sure who you are but I will tell you that coming here and making sarcastic comments is not what this site is about. We would be happy to discuss things in an adult manner. So, to refresh you memory of Post #9, "Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion." What kind of answer was this? Maybe you're not denying something BY said but you're not admitting anything either. Why be evasive? Another issue. BY has long been dead, is now dust so the only things we have are his sermons that were compiled and made into, "The Journal of Discourses." Now, BY was very careful about his sermons. He had a scribe if you want to call him that, to write down every word that BY spoke. After everything was written down, BY would edit, making sure spelling was correct etc. Afterwards, the sermon was given to the Deseret News where it was printed in their next edition. Hard to say there were mistakes made within any sermon when there was such a process to transcribe them.

[Apologette]

Well, let's find out how much credit I should give you. Show me where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. That should be really easy, since I now have a grand total of 4 posts.

Oh, really? Only four posts and you've already managed to say nothing? Just denial? Tell us why you renounce Young's teachings? Tell us how you can become a "son of god," even "a god," without polygamy?

[James Banta]

Well, let's find out how much credit I should give you. Show me where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. That should be really easy, since I now have a grand total of 4 posts.

You have been told several times now but I will still add my own.. You said "Because Brigham Young doesn't support your false ***ertion." And that you said after a quote was given, not from some anti-mormon site but directly from the LDS church owned, LDS church controlled JofD.. If you have the reference why would you deny that BY said what is recorded of him by his own church.. Now you deny your denial? This is why Christians have so much trouble with mormons as we try to communicate. You say things and then deny that statements were ever made.. Ok, you know so much tell us why Joseph Smith went totally against the teachings of the Bible to tell us that God became God (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 305).. The Bible teaches us that God has been God from everlasting and will to be the one and only true and living God to everlasting (Psalm 90:2).. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Oh, really? Only four posts and you've already managed to say nothing? Just denial? Tell us why you renounce Young's teachings? Tell us how you can become a "son of god," even "a god," without polygamy?

never fear sister.. The courts have now reversed themselves.. Polygamy has been decriminalized in Utah.. That will force the LDS church to remove the Manifesto or the 132nd section of the D&C.. If they remove the Manifesto the women of the church will have a FIT (and rightly so), If they remove the 132nd section of the D&C they confess that Smith was a sexual deviant and not a true prophet of God in giving a revelation ***igned to God teaching a false doctrine.. This is why I have been waiting for this day.. It will destroy the LDS church no matter which way they move.. Oh and if they do nothing WE WILL CHOP THEM UP.. IHS jim

[Apologette]

No I don't. You're just making stuff up now, James.


BTW I've never posted here before.

Haven't you posted on CARM, however?

[Erundur]

Mormons always have to twist words, even of their own prophet, to rationalize away their meanings.
Apologette has given up defending her position; anyone else want to try?

[James Banta]

Apologette has given up defending her position; anyone else want to try?

I see you, like all the LDS here, won't even try.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

What kind of answer was this?
A direct answer to the question I was asked.


Maybe you're not denying something BY said but you're not admitting anything either.
What do you think I was supposed to admit?


Why be evasive?
I don't think you know what "evasive" means. Would you be happier if I had answered the question she should have asked?


Hard to say there were mistakes made within any sermon when there was such a process to transcribe them.
I haven't said anything about mistakes. Why are you bringing them up?

[Erundur]

Oh, really? Only four posts and you've already managed to say nothing?
It only took one post to get you to abandon your position. :)

[Apologette]

Apologette has given up defending her position; anyone else want to try?

Actually, pal, when all the opposition has is "denial," why bother? It's useless to beat the senseless as the saying goes.

[neverending]

It only took one post to get you to abandon your position. :)

Richard, do you think you can fool anyone? So, nice to have you here and we all get to read your comments that never defend anything.
BTW, what did Apologette abandon? That she doesn't want to deal with someone who isn't here with sincerity? As I said earlier, this is a website where we have ADULT discussions to compare Mormonism with Christianity. If you want to do that, great, if not then I personally would rather have you leave. It's up to you. Follow the rules or we'll ignore you.

[Erundur]

You have been told several times now but I will still add my own..
Listen carefully, James. The challenge was to show where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. If you can't do that, then at least go back and defend the claim that I was responding to (and Apologette has already abandoned)--that Mormon men can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without multiple wives.

Otherwise, I'll just have to accept your concession that Apologette's position is in fact false.

[Erundur]

Haven't you posted on CARM, however?
I'm flattered that you think me significant enough to turn this into a thread about me ;), but I think you need to work on defending your position.

[Erundur]

I see you, like all the LDS here, won't even try..
I can't wait to hear why I'm obligated to defend Apologette's position.

[Apologette]

I'm flattered that you think me significant enough to turn this into a thread about me ;), but I think you need to work on defending your position.

Your arm to the square: Are you Richard?

[RealFakeHair]

It only took one post to get you to abandon your position. :)

Me is bout as coherent as it gets, but me don't understands yoz?

[Erundur]

Actually, pal, when all the opposition has is "denial," why bother?
You ***ume that all I have is denial (this may embar*** you later), when in fact it's all I've needed so far. The simple denial of your position was enough to destroy it, sweetheart.

[Erundur]

Richard, do you think you can fool anyone?
Obviously someone has fooled you into thinking I'm Richard. ;)


So, nice to have you here and we all get to read your comments that never defend anything.
Just like Apologette's comments that never defend anything.


BTW, what did Apologette abandon?
Her position that Mormon men can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without mutiple wives. Feel free to jump in and defend it for her, if you like.

[Erundur]

Your arm to the square: Are you Richard?
I'm touched that I'm so important to you! :'-)

[BigJulie]

Before I post it I should remind all why the LDS church abandoned polygamy..

D&C Official Declaration 1
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced const itutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

Ok to the meat.. Today U.S. District Court judge for Utah has ruled that key parts of Utah’s polygamy laws are unconst itutional. As of today it is no longer illegal to "Cohabitant" with more than one person whether or not you call them your spouse, if such is done for religious reasons.. The reason for the issuance of Official Declaration 1 is over.. Since the 132nd section of the D&C of the LDS church is still in effect it is now the duty of those LDS that would please God to start living by it's commandments.. They should at least conform their minds to the idea that polygamy is God's pattern for marriage as President Brigham Young taught.. Polygamy never really ended in mormonism with the belief that a man would still be married to his first wife if she dies before he did, even though he took a seconds wife in this life.. Both were considered his wives.. Now the resistants are off. Though no second marriage certificate can be issued (that is a matter of man's law anyway), but it is fully legal to have two, three, or more wives you may marry by the law of the church.. I have been waiting for this NEWS YEAH.... IHS jim

Interesting you think that Mormons would be affected at all by this. They don't practice polygamy....as much as you would like to think they do.

[RealFakeHair]

Interesting you think that Mormons would be affected at all by this. They don't practice polygamy....as much as you would like to think they do.

Maybe it is time for my story about the spiritual polygamy proposal, and what a dozzie it was.

[Apologette]

Me is bout as coherent as it gets, but me don't understands yoz?

Let's face it, this is going to be an issue that brings great cognitive dissonance to the table. On the one hand, you have Joseph Smith, revered by Mormons and their greatest prophet and their founder who supposedly received a revelation from God that ordered Mormon males to take plural wives. Who to believe - the current group of leaders, or the founding prophet? And now that it's basically legal (no prosecution) and cohabitation laws are found unconst i tutional, this should be a big boon for the Mormon fundies who are polygamists. Not so good for the little girls they marry following in Joe's footsteps!

[Apologette]

Obviously someone has fooled you into thinking I'm Richard. ;)


Just like Apologette's comments that never defend anything.


Her position that Mormon men can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without mutiple wives. Feel free to jump in and defend it for her, if you like.

Gee, you denounce Brigham Young? How terrible for a Mormon - who can you trust if not old Brigham?

[RealFakeHair]

Let's face it, this is going to be an issue that brings great cognitive dissonance to the table. On the one hand, you have Joseph Smith, revered by Mormons and their greatest prophet and their founder who supposedly received a revelation from God that ordered Mormon males to take plural wives. Who to believe - the current group of leaders, or the founding prophet? And now that it's basically legal (no prosecution) and cohabitation laws are found unconst i tutional, this should be a big boon for the Mormon fundies who are polygamists. Not so good for the little girls they marry following in Joe's footsteps!

The next few years might not be so happy for the LDSinc. Polygamy rase it unly head. I think it is time for my wife to ease up and let her have a sister wife. There is this 20 something blonde bombshell living down the street I've had my eye on. lol

[Apologette]

The next few years might not be so happy for the LDSinc. Polygamy rase it unly head. I think it is time for my wife to ease up and let her have a sister wife. There is this 20 something blonde bombshell living down the street I've had my eye on. lol

Forget it, she's probably a member of Calvary Chapel! How about giving your wife a brother husband?

[Apologette]

"Joseph Smith reportedly taught that the “dominion and powr” of a man’s eternal glory was directly tied to the number of wives and children he gained in mortality"(see Newell and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 99; Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 10-11, from MRM.org).

Todd Compton, LDS historian, ***erted:

“Thus in Smith’s Nauvoo ideology, a fullness of salvation depended on the quant i ty of family members sealed to a person in this life” (In Sacred Loneliness, 11, emphasis in the original).

PS: is there any reason why mature people have to be prevented from joining the letters "t" and "i" together in a certain sequence? How immature would one be to find that word stimulating in some way!

[Erundur]

Gee, you denounce Brigham Young? How terrible for a Mormon - who can you trust if not old Brigham?
Since you clearly aren't going to defend your position, I accept your concession.

[Apologette]

Since you clearly aren't going to defend your position, I accept your concession.

You have pathetically, Richard, failed to address one issue brought out above. Why not just pack it in for the day?

[Apologette]

According to Joe Smith, God revealed to him (D&C 132):

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
(My note: the primary purpose of the revelation is not dealing with "temple marriage," but the "principle" of polygamy with wives as well as unofficial wives)

2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.

(Note: The matter being addressed is what? Temple marriage? No, polygamy!)

3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.

(Note: If Mormons receive the "instructions" about polygamy they are bound to practice polygamy - case closed)

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye ****ed; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory

(Based on this revelation the "new and everlasting covenant" is plural marriage and those that reject it are ****ed and cannot become gods or goddesses).

[Snow Patrol]

According to Joe Smith, God revealed to him (D&C 132):

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
(My note: the primary purpose of the revelation is not dealing with "temple marriage," but the "principle" of polygamy with wives as well as unofficial wives)

2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.

(Note: The matter being addressed is what? Temple marriage? No, polygamy!)

3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.

(Note: If Mormons receive the "instructions" about polygamy they are bound to practice polygamy - case closed)

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye ****ed; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory

(Based on this revelation the "new and everlasting covenant" is plural marriage and those that reject it are ****ed and cannot become gods or goddesses).

Why did you stop there? Because you don't want to give away the fact that you are wrong in your ***essment.

[James Banta]

Listen carefully, James. The challenge was to show where I denied that Brigham Young said something that he said. If you can't do that, then at least go back and defend the claim that I was responding to (and Apologette has already abandoned)--that Mormon men can't get into the Celestial Kingdom without multiple wives.

Otherwise, I'll just have to accept your concession that Apologette's position is in fact false.

Here we go again because you won't listen.

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269
It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained.

As I said before I pulled that off FAIR. FAIR is a PRO LDS organization. IT is NOT ANTI mormon like you guys tell me I am.. If they agree with me while you disagree what does that say about what you believe of BY?

Just what more proof do you need more than that to prove that BY taught that, unless a person is a polygamist at least in their faith; they can gain salvation..

The only way for you not to see that your challenge was met is to shut both eyes block your ears and sing lalalalalalala.. Just like a child.. IHS jim

[Apologette]

Why did you stop there? Because you don't want to give away the fact that you are wrong in your ***essment.

No, because the beginning (the prologue) outlines what the whole false revelation is about.

How about telling me why I'm wrong, since you seem to believe that?

[Erundur]

Here we go again because you won't listen.

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269
It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained.
Where did I deny Brigham Young said this? You still haven't met the challenge.

[James Banta]

I can't wait to hear why I'm obligated to defend Apologette's position.

All I ask is that you believe what BY taught.. I have shown that to now twice.. If you do I ask are you a polygamist at lease of the heart? According to BY you can't receive the same salvation as did Abraham (exaltation) without faith in polygamy.. Christian are very different.. We put our faith in Jesus and only is Jesus.. We teach that:

Acts 4:11-12
He is the STONE WHICH WAS REJECTED by you, THE BUILDERS, but WHICH BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone. And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.

Here the LDS know better than the Holy Spirit. Salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God though Faith in Jesus.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

All I ask is that you believe what BY taught..
Why, do YOU believe what BY taught?


If you do I ask are you a polygamist at lease of the heart?
I would be if God commanded it.


Here the LDS know better than the Holy Spirit. Salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God though Faith in Jesus..
Now you're just lying.

[James Banta]

[Erundur;151072]Why, do YOU believe what BY taught?

Yes I believe that is what BY taught.. I don't believe that he was a prophet, I don't believe that he taught the Gospel, nor any part of the Bible.. But I do believe that he taught polygamy was a saving ordinance..



I would be if God commanded it.

It was taught by the prophet commanded by the man that said he had seen God and Jesus.. That is as close as you can get if you believe that Smith ans Young were called by God to lead His Church..


Now you're just lying.

That is something I NEVER DO anymore.. I have told some whoopers in my day but they always hurt me and others.. I will not lie, and I will not be called a liar.. Did you read my post or check out the reference? Could your mind understood it's meaning or are you so blinded by the false teachings of mormonism that you can no longer understand anything that doesn't come from the GAs in Salt Lake? IHS jim

[James Banta]

Where did I deny Brigham Young said this? You still haven't met the challenge.

Nope you can't read, it is doubtful that you can think.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

Yes I believe that is what BY taught..
Uh oh, did you just answer the question I should have asked? I've been told that's extremely dishonest...


That is something I NEVER DO anymore..
Wait, so you're telling me that you sincerely believe that
1) LDS know better than the Holy Spirit, and
2) Salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God though Faith in Jesus?

If you are, I'll retract my accusation.

[Erundur]

Nope you can't read, it is doubtful that you can think.. IHS jim
That's okay, I accept your concession.

[James Banta]

Actually, pal, when all the opposition has is "denial," why bother? It's useless to beat the senseless as the saying goes.

This person isn't worth our time.. He has no defense for the ANTI BIBLE teaching of mormonism both past and present. He twists what we are saying. He is breaking the rules of the Forum.. Please join me in asking him to leave through our ignoring all his posts.. IHS jim

[Apologette]

That's okay, I accept your concession.

Richard does this all the time on CARM, and oceancoast. Ocean is currently banned.

[James Banta]

Uh oh, did you just answer the question I should have asked? I've been told that's extremely dishonest...


Wait, so you're telling me that you sincerely believe that
1) LDS know better than the Holy Spirit, and
2) Salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God though Faith in Jesus?

If you are, I'll retract my accusation.

Since mormonism teaches in total contradiction to the Bible. Mormonism teaches that "Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh, and which body died on the cross and was afterward taken up by the process of resurrection" (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 4, pp. 1670-1671), "Jesus was not the son of Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal Father"(Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 2, pp. 724-725). The Holy Spirit though the Apostle Matthew tell us that Mary the mother of Jesus was found to be with Child of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:18). But as I said the LDS know better that the Holy Spirit..

BY taught that a man had to be a polygamist at least of heart to gain exaltation (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 269, August 19, 1866). Deny that? Look it up! I am saying just what I said I don't shrink from it.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

That's okay, I accept your concession.

Read it again it says where I got it..

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269
It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained.

See it now? Geeese IHS jim

[Erundur]

Since mormonism teaches in total contradiction to the Bible.
That's completely ridiculous.


But as I said the LDS know better that the Holy Spirit..
Okay, so that is your belief. Do you believe us over the Holy Spirit?


BY taught that a man had to be a polygamist at least of heart to gain exaltation (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 269, August 19, 1866). Deny that? Look it up! I am saying just what I said I don't shrink from it..
Why would I deny that? But you didn't answer the question. Do you believe that salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God through Faith in Jesus?

[Erundur]

Read it again it says where I got it..

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269
It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained.

See it now?
Yes, I still see your concession. (Hint: your claim was that I denied BY said this. That's what you need to show.)


Geeese
I saw a lot of geeese on my lunch hour walk along the Jordan River. Duuucks, too.

[Apologette]

This person isn't worth our time.. He has no defense for the ANTI BIBLE teaching of mormonism both past and present. He twists what we are saying. He is breaking the rules of the Forum.. Please join me in asking him to leave through our ignoring all his posts.. IHS jim

I know Richard from CARM. Pathetic.

[James Banta]

I know Richard from CARM. Pathetic.

If that is so he would have had to lie his way back onto Walter Martin. Lying would not be the way to show us how we are the ones who are dishonest.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Yes, I still see your concession. (Hint: your claim was that I denied BY said this. That's what you need to show.)


I saw a lot of geeese on my lunch hour walk along the Jordan River. Duuucks, too.

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269 were the words of BY.. Look here.. http://jod.mrm.org/11/273.. So what is with the denial? Is it that you have decided that being I G N O R A N T of history protects you from having to deal with the lies of mormonism, or is it that you really can't learn these things on your own? IHS jim

[James Banta]

That's completely ridiculous.


Okay, so that is your belief. Do you believe us over the Holy Spirit?


Why would I deny that? But you didn't answer the question. Do you believe that salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God through Faith in Jesus?

I am a Bible believing Christian so I deny all lies that are part of the teachings of mormonism that contradict the the Bible.. The Bible teaches that Mary was found to be with child of the Holy Ghost. BY contradicted that and that denial has been part of mormon doctrine ever since.. It therefore doesn't matter what the Holy Spirit gave remembrance to the Apostles. They know better than what He gave to the Apostles.. The Holy Spirit was wrong and BY was right. right?

Again the Holy Spirit trough the Apostle Paul taught us "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph 2:8-9). And what do I get from LDS when I quote that? DENIAL.. Oh yes they will agree as long as a person is 100% obedient to the Law, that are saved by grace.. But if sin comes into their life then they must repent or be ****ed.. It's like the LDS can't understand what the meaning of Grace..

Yes BY taught that salvation was gained through at least faith in polygamy.. Yes I know that the modern church has abandon Young in a lot of his teachings. But still without the rites of the Temple the fullness of God's salvation, as the LDS believe, is denied to mankind, is it not?.. Full salvation is only achieved through temple marriage.. The grace of God through faith in Jesus has nothing to do with it.. This highest level of LDS salvation was never spoken of by Jesus in the Bible, or by Joseph Smith in his novel the BofM. It was a later invention that fit in nicely to the adulterers Smith walked in from 1831 to the end of his life.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

Journal of Discourses 11:268-269
Sorry, I wasn't published in the Journal of Discourses, so I couldn't have denied it there. Keep trying, and your concession stands.

[Erundur]

Yes BY taught
I didn't ask about what BY taught. The question was, do you believe that salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God through Faith in Jesus?

[James Banta]

I didn't ask about what BY taught. The question was, do you believe that salvation is by polygamy, not by the grace of God through Faith in Jesus?

Come on you denied that BY taught that polygamy was the means to full mormon salvation.. Now you are wanting to change everything because you were caught in your innate denial..

Because now you want to address a different question unlike you I am not afraid to answer.. I answered this question.. in my last post.. I affirm that we are saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus.. By a faith that isn't even ours but a gift of God.. And not of works so that no one can boast.. This is the ONLY way we can gain salvation.. IHS jim

[Erundur]

Come on you denied that BY taught that polygamy was the means to full mormon salvation..
Then provide a link to my denial.

[Apologette]

Then provide a link to my denial.

Why should we do your research. If you had researched Mormonism in the first place, maybe you wouldn't be an idolater right now!

[Apologette]

Come on you denied that BY taught that polygamy was the means to full mormon salvation.. Now you are wanting to change everything because you were caught in your innate denial..

Because now you want to address a different question unlike you I am not afraid to answer.. I answered this question.. in my last post.. I affirm that we are saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus.. By a faith that isn't even ours but a gift of God.. And not of works so that no one can boast.. This is the ONLY way we can gain salvation.. IHS jim

Young did teach that polygamy was needed for full salvation:

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be ****ed," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).