When truth changes.

[alanmolstad]

http://www.mrm.org/gospel-principles


When I talk to a member of a Cult, one of the things you notice is that when the other person starts to see something that they did not know before, they race back to their Cult's leadership to find the answer.

They never race to the bible.

They dont trust their own ability to read and understand the Bible, that is because the Cult leadership has taught them that the order of things is - God, to the Cult leaders, to You....

this is why when a member of a Cult starts to see for themselves and starts to see that they cant trust the Cult's leaders, they also start to feel like a boat without an rudder.
They dont know where to turn to for guidance because they have come to always see their leadership as God's only "channel" for truth.

The problem is that the member of the Cult is even more so dependent on the leadership for truth because the so-called 'truth" that the Cult teaches has a nasty tendency to change from time to time.

This ability for the taught truths to change overnight makes the members of the Cult that much more so dependent on the leadership for truth.

They dont dare stop looking to the Cult for truth because they never know when a new truth is about to come out.

[Snow Patrol]

http://www.mrm.org/gospel-principles


When I talk to a member of a Cult, one of the things you notice is that when the other person starts to see something that they did not know before, they race back to their Cult's leadership to find the answer.

They never race to the bible.

They dont trust their own ability to read and understand the Bible, that is because the Cult leadership has taught them that the order of things is - God, to the Cult leaders, to You....

this is why when a member of a Cult starts to see for themselves and starts to see that they cant trust the Cult's leaders, they also start to feel like a boat without an rudder.
They dont know where to turn to for guidance because they have come to always see their leadership as God's only "channel" for truth.

The problem is that the member of the Cult is even more so dependent on the leadership for truth because the so-called 'truth" that the Cult teaches has a nasty tendency to change from time to time.

This ability for the taught truths to change overnight makes the members of the Cult that much more so dependent on the leadership for truth.

They dont dare stop looking to the Cult for truth because they never know when a new truth is about to come out.


So let me ask you something. In the situation you provided in the other thread you gave an example of what is someone's responsibility if they discovered something that the leadership was teaching was not correct. I'd like to expand that for a second. In the example, you suggested that after much studying a person discovers that what the leadership was teaching was incorrect. Let's suppose for a second that the person making this discovery was a faithful member for years and in full agreement with the leadership. Then, supposedly after studying they have come to this realization that the leadership is not correct. So here are my questions....

1. Is this new truth? The person knew the truth previously for years.

2. How does this person know for certainty that what he discovered really is the truth?

[alanmolstad]

new?....a new truth?.

well....lets say you were in a church that held to a teaching unknown before.
like.....

like the JWs with their teaching that Christ returned already...but invisibly.

so lets say that is a teaching of your church that you now think is in error.
You can support your view that the teaching is wrong based on many things.....but in the end you simply think that the teaching is dead wrong....you also see that this one teaching is the very heart of many other teachings taught by the leadership as fact.....but now you believe the whole thing is a house of cards that needs to fall...


who is this person that needs to take a stand against error?......... it' s you.

[alanmolstad]

So let me ask you something.

2. How does this person know for certainty that what he discovered really is the truth?
remember how when Paul would teach that the Bareenes would hear what Paul taught then opened their bible to see if what Paul said was true.


this is our example for today.
the teachings we hear from the leadership should be put to the test of scripture ...

[alanmolstad]

im on my phone now....on the road....so my answers should be viewed with understanding that i will say more later... lol

[neverending]

So let me ask you something. In the situation you provided in the other thread you gave an example of what is someone's responsibility if they discovered something that the leadership was teaching was not correct. I'd like to expand that for a second. In the example, you suggested that after much studying a person discovers that what the leadership was teaching was incorrect. Let's suppose for a second that the person making this discovery was a faithful member for years and in full agreement with the leadership. Then, supposedly after studying they have come to this realization that the leadership is not correct. So here are my questions....

1. Is this new truth? The person knew the truth previously for years.

2. How does this person know for certainty that what he discovered really is the truth?

I'd like to try and answer. May I say, how do you know that the things you've been taught all your life are true? You say they are, only because that's all you've known. And why when I studied Mormonism so many years ago and found it wanting and out of line with Biblical teachings, that what I then learned and believed was true? How do we know anyone's beliefs are true? If someone wants something bad enough, they can believe it. All humans want acceptance, love and feelings of belonging. Those are strong emotional needs and many will believe anything to fill those needs. All anyone can do is read the scriptures, compare what is written there with what they're being taught and if what is being taught doesn't line up with scripture, then stop listening, leave and find a church that teaches ONLY what is within God's word. Any deviation away from God's word should never be acceptable.

[alanmolstad]

the thing with people in charge however is that getting power over people is fun.
leadership tends to want to be the lone voice of a church....
leadership does not like to share.

so what happens a lot is that leadership goes from helping people come to the truth to seeing itself as the only channel where people can seek the truth.

this is where a church turns and starts to act like a Cult.

A cult will tell its members that they lack the ability to find truth on their own.
A cult will teach its members that all truths come to the members Only via the leadership.

When the member of a cult believes all truth comes down only from the cult leadership it puts the person as being now held slave to the leadership.

Without being in good standing with the leadership the person is lost......with no way to learn what "new Truth" God may be sending down each day.


this is why we have to protect our right to seek truth on our own......

[alanmolstad]

so when you talk to a member of a Cult you cant think that you two can just dive into the bible to see what it teaches....

you cant do that at first because the cult member does not trust their own ability to read the bible on their own.
So helping the person see that they have the Right to read the bible on their own to seek truth is *** One.

[Snow Patrol]

so when you talk to a member of a Cult you cant think that you two can just dive into the bible to see what it teaches....

you cant do that at first because the cult member does not trust their own ability to read the bible on their own.
So helping the person see that they have the Right to read the bible on their own to seek truth is *** One.

It is not that I don't trust my own ability, I'm just following what the Bible says.

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight."
Proverbs 3:5-6 :o

[Snow Patrol]

the thing with people in charge however is that getting power over people is fun.
leadership tends to want to be the lone voice of a church....
leadership does not like to share.

so what happens a lot is that leadership goes from helping people come to the truth to seeing itself as the only channel where people can seek the truth.

this is where a church turns and starts to act like a Cult.

A cult will tell its members that they lack the ability to find truth on their own.
A cult will teach its members that all truths come to the members Only via the leadership.

When the member of a cult believes all truth comes down only from the cult leadership it puts the person as being now held slave to the leadership.



Which is why I really like that we are told to go to God with every question we have.

[alanmolstad]

Which is why I really like that we are told to go to God with every question we have.

the Bible's example for us to follow is seen at Acts 17:11

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."


Not only do each of us have the RIGHT to search the scriptures on our own to find the truth, we have this as our Standard!

We have the "duty" to search the bible on our own to conform that what our church leadership is saying is true or not?

[Snow Patrol]

the Bible's example for us to follow is seen at Acts 17:11

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."


Not only do each of us have the RIGHT to search the scriptures on our own to find the truth, we have this as our Standard!

We have the "duty" to search the bible on our own to conform that what our church leadership is saying is true or not?

Ok, so if the leaders have used the same Bible as you have used to determine truth, then who has the actual truth?

For example, don't Trinitarians and Modalists both use the same Bible to come to the basis for their views?

[alanmolstad]

Im talking about You...

Im talking about me too....all of us.

we each have not only the RIGHT to search the scriptures, but the duty to do so.

I find NO MERIT at all in a church patting itself on the back for having 100% unity on teachings, if the teachings are what I know to be against what the bible teaches.

100% unity while being totally wrong is not much to brag about.


But church leadership will try to take a position over both of us .
church leadership will try to slide in between the believer and the lord.
Suddenly the very people we turned to for "help" finding truth take it upon themselves to teach that "they" are the only channel for finding truth.

they went from being helpful "***istants" to Cultist "dictators".


What Im saying is that when we see this start to happen we need to vote with our feet....

rise up
turn
walk out...



so the answer to your first question is - "You have the right to determine this"

You have this right.
I know, I know that many in leadership will try to teach us both that we have no 'right" to read the Bible seeking truth apart from their guidance.

But we have to stand up sometimes in defense of what we see is truth, and that means we have to come to the conclusion that this is our "right" to do so...


we have the "right" to disagree........

[alanmolstad]

so....what really am I talking about?

Im saying that each of us has to always be aware of two things....

#1 - we have the Right and duty to seek truth on our own, and to defend truth when and where we feel the need to do so.

#2 - They will not like it....They will try to take this "Right" away from us and replace it with only unquestioning servitude.



But we know we have to be always ready to stand up to error.
we know that the church is always in danger of teaching false teachings if good men sit on their hands and do nothing while false teachings splash about freely.

So, this means that if one day we are in a study of a text, and we come to the carefull decision that what we are being taught by the leadership is in error?....then we have to be ready stand on our convictions.

"But Alan, this teaching is the teaching of the whole church"

"It's still wrong"

"But Alan, this teaching came down from the very lips of the Prophet himself"

"It does not matter if it came down from the lips of Peter,Paul Mary and Jesus, if its wrong its wrong, and it needs to go"

[Snow Patrol]

Im talking about You...

Im talking about me too....all of us.

we each have not only the RIGHT to search the scriptures, but the duty to do so.


I wholeheartedly agree. However, that doesn't diminish my question of who has the actual truth. Are we each the deciders of our own truth?

[alanmolstad]

I wholeheartedly agree. ......Shhhh....never let james see that!...He:rolleyes: will think we are up to something

[RealFakeHair]

It is not that I don't trust my own ability, I'm just following what the Bible says.

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways submit to him, and he will make your paths straight."
Proverbs 3:5-6 :o

How do you know Proverbs 3:5-6. Was translated correctly?

[Phoenix]

Im saying that each of us has to always be aware of two things....

#1 - we have the Right and duty to seek truth on our own, and to defend truth when and where we feel the need to do so.

There was a man named Joseph Smith who felt the same way.


#2 - They will not like it....They will try to take this "Right" away from us and replace it with only unquestioning servitude.
That is what Joseph Smith experienced. The "established" religion did not like that he sought truth on his own. They wanted him to just remain in unquestioning servitude to the prevailing ideas about God.


But we know we have to be always ready to stand up to error.
Joseph Smith believed he was doing that.


we know that the church is always in danger of teaching false teachings if good men sit on their hands and do nothing while false teachings splash about freely.
Joseph Smith believed that the prevailing churches were teaching false teachings, and that people were sitting on their hands and doing nothing about it.


"But Alan, this teaching is the teaching of the whole church"
Trinitarianism is what the whole church was teaching in the 1800s.


"It's still wrong"
Amen.


"But Alan, this teaching came down from the very lips of the Prophet himself"
"It does not matter if it came down from the lips of Peter,Paul Mary and Jesus, if its wrong its wrong, and it needs to go"
Interesting statement. So if Trinitarianism is wrong, it is wrong and needs to go. :)

[alanmolstad]

..... Are we each the deciders of our own truth?

I will tell you a story:

I worked with a JW .
We debated religion every day for years and years.
He had family high up in the Watchtower...He took pride in the number of Hours he went door to door.
so he was a 'true believer" in the JW and in the watchtower.

But I was his friend and we worked on stuff together on the weekends, and one time I had him over to help me fix something in the yard , and we were talking about the Bible.

I got my bible out and showed him a verse that really challenged the watchtower's teachings.
He started to go out to his car to get his little JW books that he always carried.

I told him,"You dont need them little books, you got the Bible in your hands, That is where the truth is found!"

Well, he tried to open his bible and read what I was pointing to, but he was so frustrated...
You see he was not used to doing a Bible study without the guidance of his little JW books.

He started to get up to get his books again and I once again said that "You dont need them books to find the truth!"

But he just shrugged and kept getting up, telling me, "I got to use them"

He came back, and was all ready to go now...boy he was all fired up!

...You see his little books had every answer for him to use all ready to copy word for word.

I knew the whole effort was pointless now.

it was pointless because the guy was totally convinced that he had no right to study the bible on his own, nor had the smarts to study the bible on his own.

the Watchtower had totally convinced him that he was LOST without their help.

What i have learned over time is that all CULTS do this same mind-*** on their members.
The CULT will teach the member that "Alone you are Lost"

the Cult will teach the member that to be apart from the leadership of the Cult is to be apart from God.

the leadership and God become the same ...you cant disagree with one and not the other.


what Im saying on this topic is that you have the right to disagree.....
Im saying you have the right to seek truth on your own.

[Snow Patrol]

what Im saying on this topic is that you have the right to disagree.....
Im saying you have the right to seek truth on your own.

Again, we are in agreement.

However, you aren't answering my questions. Who/what decides the ultimate truth? Do we each decide what is true for us?

[alanmolstad]

What Im saying on this topic is that you have the right to disagree.


Im saying you have the right to seek truth on your own.


Do you think this way too?
Do you believe you have a right to disagree with church leadership?
Do you believe you have the right to open the Bible and put to the test all things you hear, so that you know what to hold fast to?


Do we each decide what is true for us?
Who has the *** of clearing my driveway of snow?......Me or God?

I got 6" inches of fresh snow to deal with, the kids got to get to school, the rest of us got to get to work....people are counting on getting out.

So am I to roll over and bed and say, "it's God's snow, let him deal with it"?

Should I get down on my knees and pray real hard for the next 2 hours that God cleans the snow so that we can get out"....

Or....is this why I was moved to get that new snow-****er this year?

The answer is that we should get off our lazy buts and get busy doing our ***.

and, Seeking truth is our ***.

[alanmolstad]

You and I have so many great advatages over others in the world.

We can point across the room to where a bible sits.
we can go to a christian book store and take home all the bibles we can carry.
we have it easy.

but a lot of this world the story is very different.
there are lands on this earth that never hear the name of "Jesus"
they do not have a bible....they never will hear of the Christian faith.

But what Im saying is that there is a unity we have with such people, in that both us that have it easy, and they who suffer so all still have the same "right" to seek truth on our own.

its a right we should hold most dear.
its a duty we should not seek to avoid.

And God tells us that "If you search for me, you will find me"

[Snow Patrol]

What Im saying on this topic is that you have the right to disagree.


Im saying you have the right to seek truth on your own.


Do you think this way too?

Absolutely.




Do you believe you have a right to disagree with church leadership?

Absolutely



Do you believe you have the right to open the Bible and put to the test all things you hear, so that you know what to hold fast to?

Absolutely



Do we each decide what is true for us?
Who has the *** of clearing my driveway of snow?......Me or God?

I got 6" inches of fresh snow to deal with, the kids got to get to school, the rest of us got to get to work....people are counting on getting out.

So am I to roll over and bed and say, "it's God's snow, let him deal with it"?

Should I get down on my knees and pray real hard for the next 2 hours that God cleans the snow so that we can get out"....

Or....is this why I was moved to get that new snow-****er this year?

The answer is that we should get off our lazy buts and get busy doing our ***.

and, Seeking truth is our ***.

:-) Alanmolstad, I'm really trying hard to follow your answer on this but I just don't see how that relates to my question.


Really what I'm getting at is.... what happens when two people independently reach different conclusions after reading the same Bible? Who decides which one of these people has the actual truth? And yes, I agree they have the right to disagree and they each have the right to search for truth. :-)

[alanmolstad]

However, you aren't answering my questions.

Well.....I have posted about 50Million words answering your questions in a manner I felt at the time was enlightened....

So.....I gave it a good try..:confused:

[RealFakeHair]

Absolutely.

:-)

Do you believe you believe Joseph Smith jr. was a true prophet and also believe the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction and still be a member of the LDSinc. In good standing?

[alanmolstad]

Who decides ...?

You keep asking that over and over....
Clearly you don't like my answer of "you"

Im running out of different ways to say "you"


its like with the snow building up in my driveway...
Sure I can pray about it until Im blue in the face, I can try to blame the snow on God, or try to say that its someone else problem...etc,etc,etc,, but in the end, the final answer is that getting rid of that snow is "my ***"....

The search for truth is not a *** left up to someone else to do for us.
We dont do ourselves any thing to brag about if we leave all that "bible stuff' up to a church leadership, if we know that the teachings of that same leadership are wrong.

We have nothing to brag about that our church is 100% united in teachings if we also know that the teachings are in error.

we also see that error can take over a church because good men sit and do nothing,,,
|

So who has the *** of finding and defending truth?........guess who_____?

[Snow Patrol]

Well.....I have posted about 50Million words answering your questions in a manner I felt at the time was enlightened....

So.....I gave it a good try..:confused:

No worries. If you could point out where you specifically said how two people who came to different conclusions could decide who was right that would be awesome. You do agree that two different people who hold different outcomes can both have truth, right?

[Snow Patrol]

You keep asking that over and over....
Clearly you don't like my answer of "you"

Im running out of different ways to say "you"


Ok. Then am I correct in saying you don't believe in absolute truth? You believe truth is whatever a person decides it to be?

[RealFakeHair]

The Holy Ghost, doesn't give two side of the truth. The Holy Bible gives us the truth, it is up to us to believe it or not.
There is Biblical truth, and then there is opinion. Seeing my opinion is the only one worth typing about I see no need to conjure up less of the truth.

[alanmolstad]

Ok. Then am I correct in saying you don't believe in absolute truth? You believe truth is whatever a person decides it to be?nah,,,,thats getting too psychosocialogical...LOL

I think truth is whatever is true, and leave it at that....

Let the big-brains deal with the "absolute truth"

[RealFakeHair]

nah,,,,thats getting too psychosocialogical...LOL

I think truth is whatever is true, and leave it at that....

Let the big-brains deal with the "absolute truth"
You didn't have to mention me.

[Snow Patrol]

nah,,,,thats getting too psychosocialogical...LOL

I think truth is whatever is true, and leave it at that....

Let the big-brains deal with the "absolute truth"


It really isn't that difficult. :-) Suppose you say the sun revolves around the earth and I say the earth revolves around the sun... we both can't be right, right?

[alanmolstad]

...how two people who came to different conclusions could decide who was right ?
What we have God's word on , is that if we search for Him we will find him.

So we know we are instructed to do the searching...(some people miss that point)

And, being "united in Christ" with the Christian church or with a friend who is with you in a bible Study (like you and I are in right now) does not mean you had to stop thinking for yourself.

It means that when you and I gather in this search for the true Jesus of the bible, that this very same Jesus has promised that he stands with us...even if on this road we take a few wrong paths that just loop around going no where...

Jesus is not in a hurry.
Jesus does not have another meeting to get to....Jesus is not under pressure to hurry us along.
He will allow us to take all the time we need.


We dont have to worry that we end this within the next hour with a weird 'joint statement" that we both can agree to being 1/2 of what you think and 1/2 of what i think.

But we have God's word that if we search for Him, we will find Him.

[alanmolstad]

It really isn't that difficult. :-) Suppose you say the sun revolves around the earth and I say the earth revolves around the sun... we both can't be right, right?

see post #33 for my answer, (same answer to same question)

[RealFakeHair]

What we have God's word on , is that if we search for Him we will find him.

So we know we are instructed to do the searching...(some people miss that point)

And, being "united in Christ" with the Christian church or with a friend who is with you in a bible Study (like you and I are in right now) does not mean you had to stop thinking for yourself.

It means that when you and I gather in this search for the true Jesus of the bible, that this very same Jesus has promised that he stands with us...even if on this road we take a few wrong paths that just loop around going no where...

Jesus is not in a hurry.
Jesus does not have another meeting to get to....Jesus is not under pressure to hurry us along.
He will allow us to take all the time we need.

Sorry, but this is where you are wrong. Jesus said, "Now is the accepted time, behold, now is the day of salvation."
We are not guaranteed of tomorrow.

[alanmolstad]

Sorry, but this is where you are wrong. Jesus said, "Now is the accepted time, behold, now is the day of salvation."
We are not guaranteed of tomorrow.

Me?....wrong?
(if I had a dime...)


My point is that salvation can come now,,,but it does not need to be forced.
The Holy Spirit is a gentleman.

He does not kick in the door to our hearts.
He does not force us to believe.

Rather the Lord stands at the door and knocks.

Today any man could believe, and thus would be a great day of salvation.

But tomorrow works for the Lord too......

I once was in a childrens summer Bible camp.
And there was this whole push to get people to step forward and give their hearts to jesus....

I watched a lot of kids feel very pressured to go forward, just to get the people from pestering them mostly.
from that time on I have learned that it's best to say what needs to be said, then be ready to answer questions.
but the moment we try to push "getting saved" on to others as if we were in the final 2 min of a football game we do them no favors.

The Spirit will show them when its time....not my wrist watch.

[RealFakeHair]

Me?....wrong?


My point is that salvation can come now,,,but it does not need to be forced.
The Holy Spirit is a gentleman.

He does not kick in the door to our hearts.
He does not force us to believe.

Rather the Lord stands at the door and knocks.

Today you could believe, and thus would be a great day of salvation.

But tomorrow works for the Lord too......
What! Tomorrow is Sa****ay, its the weekend, I'll start Monday.

[Snow Patrol]

What we have God's word on , is that if we search for Him we will find him.

So we know we are instructed to do the searching...(some people miss that point)

And, being "united in Christ" with the Christian church or with a friend who is with you in a bible Study (like you and I are in right now) does not mean you had to stop thinking for yourself.

It means that when you and I gather in this search for the true Jesus of the bible, that this very same Jesus has promised that he stands with us...even if on this road we take a few wrong paths that just loop around going no where...

Jesus is not in a hurry.
Jesus does not have another meeting to get to....Jesus is not under pressure to hurry us along.
He will allow us to take all the time we need.


We dont have to worry that we end this within the next hour with a weird 'joint statement" that we both can agree to being 1/2 of what you think and 1/2 of what i think.

But we have God's word that if we search for Him, we will find Him.

Alright, I have your answer now. Thanks. We do differ on this as I believe there is such a thing as absolute truth.

Thanks for the discussion. I believe we were looking at the questions just a little differently and that was reflected in the answers we gave.

[RealFakeHair]

Alright, I have your answer now. Thanks. We do differ on this as I believe there is such a thing as absolute truth.

Thanks for the discussion. I believe we were looking at the questions just a little differently and that was reflected in the answers we gave.

Great, now if we can only get you to accept the absolute truth. Wow this Thread can be closed now.

[alanmolstad]

ok
I will wait for any future questions and comments on this issue.

[alanmolstad]

so.......Um.....where did everyone go then?

(you can post too TheWay, it's friday, Im in a good mood....the week p***ed and no one was killed and i cant get sued)

[alanmolstad]

shhh...never is going to post

[neverending]

What we have God's word on , is that if we search for Him we will find him.

So we know we are instructed to do the searching...(some people miss that point)

And, being "united in Christ" with the Christian church or with a friend who is with you in a bible Study (like you and I are in right now) does not mean you had to stop thinking for yourself.

It means that when you and I gather in this search for the true Jesus of the bible, that this very same Jesus has promised that he stands with us...even if on this road we take a few wrong paths that just loop around going no where...

Jesus is not in a hurry.
Jesus does not have another meeting to get to....Jesus is not under pressure to hurry us along.
He will allow us to take all the time we need.


We dont have to worry that we end this within the next hour with a weird 'joint statement" that we both can agree to being 1/2 of what you think and 1/2 of what i think.

But we have God's word that if we search for Him, we will find Him.

alan, what we all can agree on here is this, there are no two people who when asking God to show them the truth will receive the same answer. Someone within the LDS Church can pray and tell everyone that YES! I received the truth from God after much prayer and even fasting. A Christian needing an answer can pray and they too will say, YES! I received an answer from God and know that I received the truth. With that said, how then can anyone know who has truly received the truth? As I said this morning, if a person wants something bad enough, they'll receive the answers they're seeking.
What is the truth then? For me, it is knowing that Jesus is God, has always been God. He was born, lived a sinless life, taught ONLY His gospel, and was crucified, rose on the third day and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father. That is the truth and ALL Christians believe this, if not then they are not Christians. We do not believe in extra Biblical revelations. We do not have prophets for our prophet is Jesus and we have been told in Hebrews 1:1-3, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." This is truth, no doubts about it.

[alanmolstad]

Paragraphs..........
its hard to read a big-honkin' wad of text....

[alanmolstad]

Alan, what we all can agree on here is this - There are no two people who when asking God to show them the truth will receive the same answer.

Someone within the LDS Church can pray and tell everyone that "YES! I received the truth from God after much prayer and even fasting!".
A Christian needing an answer can pray and they too will say, "YES! I received an answer from God and know that I received the truth."

With that said, how then can anyone know who has truly received the truth?
As I said this morning, if a person wants something bad enough, they'll receive the answers they're seeking.

What is the truth then?

For me, it is knowing that Jesus is God, has always been God.
He was born, lived a sinless life, taught ONLY His gospel, and was crucified, rose on the third day and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father.

That is the truth and ALL Christians believe this, if not then they are not Christians.

We do not believe in extra Biblical revelations.
We do not have prophets for our prophet is Jesus and we have been told in Hebrews 1:1-3, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."

This is truth, no doubts about it









(I added paragraphs, and space)

(2nd edit addition - It's actually a very good comment to post on the forum, and as you can tell...I read every word several times...LOL...)

[neverending]

Paragraphs..........
its hard to read a big-honkin' wad of text....

alan, I take offense at you changing my post! You are not a moderator here nor are you my English teacher! As you've probably noticed, I use a larger font size to make it EASIER for people to read and my post was not some BIG-HONKIN WAD of TEXT!!! Get over yourself. You come here and take over ever thread and then bring old **** from members who are over at CARM and also members who have been banned for life here! I've about had it. Maybe Jill has too? :mad:

[alanmolstad]

[SIZE=3]alan, I take offense at you changing my post! where do you take it to?

[John T]

Which is why I really like that we are told to go to God with every question we have.

Too bad that you do not go to the Word of God, the Bible.

Any subjective experience is impossible to compare properly evaluate since you LDS believe in personal revelation (aka experiences of the moment) as the sole arbiter of truth.God's word, the Bible does not change; that is why it is the only rule for both the faith and practice of the Christian.

[John T]

alan, I take offense at you changing my post! You are not a moderator here nor are you my English teacher! As you've probably noticed, I use a larger font size to make it EASIER for people to read and my post was not some BIG-HONKIN WAD of TEXT!!! Get over yourself. You come here and take over ever thread and then bring old **** from members who are over at CARM and also members who have been banned for life here! I've about had it. Maybe Jill has too? :mad:

I can understand your ire, but I do not think that Alan was really not being deliberately offensive,

His complaint is that when you change to a new paragraph, it is best to double space so that there can be more "white" between the text groups. It aslso helps when reading, also.

However, your complaint about Alan's playing "moderator" are quite justified IMHO. I have had my "tiffs" with him about that.

[neverending]

I can understand your ire, but I do not think that Alan was really not being deliberately offensive,

His complaint is that when you change to a new paragraph, it is best to double space so that there can be more "white" between the text groups. It aslso helps when reading, also.

However, your complaint about Alan's playing "moderator" are quite justified IMHO. I have had my "tiffs" with him about that.

Well, I can see that all you men stick together, thanks for nothing! I am still offended and find alan has no right to change anyone's post! I guess I will go away then since my way of posting is causing all you men problems. Poor babies!

[neverending]

where do you take it to?

I'd sure like to tell you where you can take it, or should I say, where you can put it!!!

[neverending]

where do you take it to?

So you think this is funny? GREAT! Have fun, but not at my expense, BYE, have a nice life!

[alanmolstad]

It's so hard for the eye to read a big wad of text on a computer when there are no breaks for the eye to rest at...nothing to show the person when one topic/subject ends and another begins......
And the use of bigger yet thinner text is of no help at all as far as being able to stay on-track to a persons point in what is a monster long paragraph.....

[alanmolstad]

another thing you see with members of a Cult is that while they say they might believe in the Bible, but what the Cult means by "the Bible" is not really the same thing as what a Christian means,

Most Cults know that as the bible stands as written they would have a problem finding support for many of the false teachings of the Cult.
The result is that many Cults have their own version of the bible that they place into the hands of members of the Cult.

It might be just a normal Bible text but with the addition of the Cult's footnotes and other "bible helps' that help the Cults members maintain the teachings that the bible does not actually support.

Another way the Cult may handle the problem it has with the bible is to come out with their own "translation"
the Cult's efforts here is to change the wording on the bible on the verses that they find are the most in disagreement with their false teachings.
This is another good way for the Cult to appear to be like Christians and use the Bible, while at the same time be changing the text of the Bible to agree with the Cults different teachings.

The 3rd way a Cult may use to handle the Bible problem is to simply come out with their own different holy Book that they place before the members of the Cult as if it were truly equal to the normal Bible.
When you have ditched the bible and come up with a whole new one you can have a great advantage in being able to start from scratch and write things into the Cult's bible that fully support the Cult's teachings.


If response to all this, the christian only has the Bible.

[James Banta]

I wholeheartedly agree. However, that doesn't diminish my question of who has the actual truth. Are we each the deciders of our own truth?

Do you own a copy of the Bible? I don't even care if it's the JSP.. The Gospel is still in there. That would mean that Snow you have the truth. Whether you believe that it is the truth or not you have it in your possession.. That truth is made clear even in the JSP.. 1. God is one Lord.. 2. There are three Persons all called God in the Bible, yet even Jesus confirmed that God is One LORD.. 3. All of mankind is in sin. 4. Jesus paid the full price for sin. 5. To access the grace of God made available through the work Jesus did in payment for our sin, we must believe in Him..

I think you have said that few people hold those views but every Christian I have met online holds those Biblical statements as doctrine.. Can you point to those that don't? IHS jim

[John T]

Well, I can see that all you men stick together, thanks for nothing! I am still offended and find alan has no right to change anyone's post! I guess I will go away then since my way of posting is causing all you men problems. Poor babies!

You have something against men??? :rolleyes:

In all seriousness, it is not a gender issue, and FYI, I agreed more with you than I have with Alan. It was a READABILITY ISSUE that I addressed. As to Alan changing your post, I l know nothing about that, and properly you need to address it with Jill, and not on the open forum.

Here in that same post is a clear statement about my agreement with you about what Alan has done:
However, your complaint about Alan's playing "moderator" are quite justified IMHO. I have had my "tiffs" with him about that.

As a result of what I posted, I cannot see any support for what you posted to me in complaint.

Is it possible to address the OP now?

[alanmolstad]

some people's kids!

[John T]

I wholeheartedly agree. However, that doesn't diminish my question of who has the actual truth. Are we each the deciders of our own truth?
There is no such thing as "relative truth" as you seem to suggest.

That is because truth is propositional in that it says, "This is true, and that does not conform to truth."

Truth is its own self indicator in the fact that once truth is stated, further discussion is irrelevant.

Truth is also not contradictory due to its ontological nature. or one to state that there is "Mormon truth" and there is "Christian truth" which can be contradictory, yet remain true is fallacious and impossible argumentation.

[alanmolstad]

Is it possible to address the OP now?

"When I talk to a member of a Cult, one of the things you notice is that when the other person starts to see something that they did not know before, they race back to their Cult's leadership to find the answer.

They never race to the bible.

They dont trust their own ability to read and understand the Bible, that is because the Cult leadership has taught them that the order of things is - God, to the Cult leaders, to You....

this is why when a member of a Cult starts to see for themselves and starts to see that they cant trust the Cult's leaders, they also start to feel like a boat without an rudder.
They dont know where to turn to for guidance because they have come to always see their leadership as God's only "channel" for truth.

The problem is that the member of the Cult is even more so dependent on the leadership for truth because the so-called 'truth" that the Cult teaches has a nasty tendency to change from time to time.

This ability for the taught truths to change overnight makes the members of the Cult that much more so dependent on the leadership for truth.

They dont dare stop looking to the Cult for truth because they never know when a new truth is about to come out. '

[RealFakeHair]

"When I talk to a member of a Cult, one of the things you notice is that when the other person starts to see something that they did not know before, they race back to their Cult's leadership to find the answer.

They never race to the bible.

They dont trust their own ability to read and understand the Bible, that is because the Cult leadership has taught them that the order of things is - God, to the Cult leaders, to You....

this is why when a member of a Cult starts to see for themselves and starts to see that they cant trust the Cult's leaders, they also start to feel like a boat without an rudder.
They dont know where to turn to for guidance because they have come to always see their leadership as God's only "channel" for truth.

The problem is that the member of the Cult is even more so dependent on the leadership for truth because the so-called 'truth" that the Cult teaches has a nasty tendency to change from time to time.

This ability for the taught truths to change overnight makes the members of the Cult that much more so dependent on the leadership for truth.

They dont dare stop looking to the Cult for truth because they never know when a new truth is about to come out. '


I find it interesting how a TBM can justify the LDSinc. Complete reversal on such absolute LDSinc. Truths. Such as polygamy for Exaltation. This was one of Joseph Smith jr. invention that lead to his death, yet LDSinc. today totally disregard this one doctrinal LDSinc. Principle.

[alanmolstad]

Another thing...

The Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the 7th Dayers, and Armstrong-ism all have a "truth" that changes.

This means that the teachings of such religions of 100 years ago would have changed so much by now that if a person from a 100 or so years ago were to show up and try to teach the same as what he knew from his time , they would be kicked out for it.

You cant be a Mormon from the age when Mormonism started and try to fit-in with modern Mormonism...

The founder of the Mormonism or the founder of the JW's etc, would get themselves booted out of their religion if they tried to teach their old teachings in the modern religions that they started.

This is one of the ways the modern Cults keep a firm hold on their members.
The member of a Cult feels the need to stick close to the Cult because of the ability of the teachings held by the Cult to change over night.

From day to day the Cult member is never really sure that what believes as the "Truth" today will still be promoted as the "truth " tomorrow.

This also means that each member of a Cult you talk to, no matter how strongly they protest that "They have the truth" also knows deep down in their hearts that what they tell people is the "Truth" could change without warning, and actually get them kicked-out of their church in the future....

[Snow Patrol]

Another thing...

The Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the 7th Dayers, and Armstrong-ism all have a "truth" that changes.

This means that the teachings of such religions of 100 years ago would have changed so much by now that if a person from a 100 or so years ago were to show up and try to teach the same as what he knew from his time , they would be kicked out for it.

You cant be a Mormon from the age when Mormonism started and try to fit-in with modern Mormonism...

The founder of the Mormonism or the founder of the JW's etc, would get themselves booted out of their religion if they tried to teach their old teachings in the modern religions that they started.

This is one of the ways the modern Cults keep a firm hold on their members.
The member of a Cult feels the need to stick close to the Cult because of the ability of the teachings held by the Cult to change over night.

From day to day the Cult member is never really sure that what believes as the "Truth" today will still be promoted as the "truth " tomorrow.

This also means that each member of a Cult you talk to, no matter how strongly they protest that "They have the truth" also knows deep down in their hearts that what they tell people is the "Truth" could change without warning, and actually get them kicked-out of their church in the future....

Are you saying Christian churches don't change their teachings? What about the teaching that women can't be leaders in the church? Does your church teach the exact same things as the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd century church?


Also, weren't you the one who asked what one would do if after studying the Bible they came to a different understanding of a teaching than the leadership of the church taught that they could either try and change the leaderships teaching or leave the church and go to one that taught the way they now believed? What is the difference there?

[alanmolstad]

Are you saying Christian churches don't change their teachings? What about the teaching that women can't be leaders in the church? Does your church teach the exact same things as the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd century church?


well lets look at the essential teachings...

salvation by grace though faith?...the creed?....

100 years ago?........the same.


Now, according to Mormonism?.....(have you seen the video I posted on how the Mormons have changed the requirements of exaltation ?)

[Snow Patrol]

well lets look at the essential teachings...


Wait, who said we were talking about essential teachings. You sure didn't say that initially.



Now, according to Mormonism?.....(have you seen the video I posted on how the Mormons have changed the requirements of exaltation ?)

No, because I don't have the time to watch the videos. Sorry. Maybe you could summarize?

[alanmolstad]

Also, weren't you the one who asked what one would do if after studying the Bible they came to a different understanding of a teaching than the leadership of the church taught that they could either try and change the leaderships teaching or leave the church and go to one that taught the way they now believed? What is the difference there?I think you confuse the "point of view"

If you check with what I wrote, you will note I was speaking from the point of view of the individual ....
What Im saying is that if a person looks to the bible for truth, and then understands that the leadership of his religion are in error, then he should vote with his feet, rise up, turn, and walk out.

I will provide links to what I wrote here in a moment so you can check.

What Im saying here now is connected to what I have wrote before about the "person" being the one responsible for seeking truth and defending truth.

When a Leadership goes off the rails it falls to the "person" to defend truth.

This is why Cults will be so quick to come down hard on their members that try to read and study the bible apart from the Cults guidance. The last thing the Cult wants is some of their members doing a Bible study that is not under the watchful control of the Leadership.

This is how Cults are able to flip-flop their teachings on the requirements for entering the kingdom (or ascending to higher levels in the afterlife etc) and have it simply believed without question by the members....
They don't dare question anything, they don't question it because they are so used to the idea that "truth" can change over night!

[alanmolstad]

Wait, who said we were talking about essential teachings. You sure didn't say that initially.




If you would like me to go back to anything I have written and make it more clear what i was pointing to?...just ask?.....any post, and comment I have made?....

[alanmolstad]

No, because I don't have the time to watch the videos. Sorry. Maybe you could summarize?

Well,,,when the free time opens up...they will be here.

I will post more this week so that you can find one short enough to your liking...(There are many to pick from and Im sure I can find one within your limited time to watch it within)

[Snow Patrol]

Well,,,when the free time opens up...they will be here.

I will post more this week so that you can find one short enough to your liking...(There are many to pick from and Im sure I can find one within your limited time to watch it within)

Honestly, I have no interest in watching the videos. If you can't present the question/information then I'm really not interested in pursuing further. I do in between phone calls at work and when I'm at home, I'm with my family. Sorry.

[Snow Patrol]

If you would like me to go back to anything I have written and make it more clear what i was pointing to?...just ask?.....any post, and comment I have made?....

"The Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the 7th Dayers, and Armstrong-ism all have a "truth" that changes.

This means that the teachings of such religions of 100 years ago would have changed so much by now that if a person from a 100 or so years ago were to show up and try to teach the same as what he knew from his time , they would be kicked out for it.

You cant be a Mormon from the age when Mormonism started and try to fit-in with modern Mormonism...

The founder of the Mormonism or the founder of the JW's etc, would get themselves booted out of their religion if they tried to teach their old teachings in the modern religions that they started.

This is one of the ways the modern Cults keep a firm hold on their members.
The member of a Cult feels the need to stick close to the Cult because of the ability of the teachings held by the Cult to change over night.

From day to day the Cult member is never really sure that what believes as the "Truth" today will still be promoted as the "truth " tomorrow.

This also means that each member of a Cult you talk to, no matter how strongly they protest that "They have the truth" also knows deep down in their hearts that what they tell people is the "Truth" could change without warning, and actually get them kicked-out of their church in the future...."


Where in here are you talking about the essential doctrines? I can't find it. So when I ask you about changes that Christian churches have made over the years you reply with "essential" beliefs. I think you do this because you know that christian churches have changed the "truth" that it teaches over the years and so your argument falls apart and so you have to change the goal posts to be only the "essential" doctrines.

[alanmolstad]

Honestly, I have no interest in watching the videos. .......

Thats ok....others may find the information interesting.

I will try to post a bunch of videos this week to help start new topics about the different subject matter in the videos.

There are some very interesting topics that I have seen on a few of these videos that i never really had known much about before.

[alanmolstad]

"The Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the 7th Dayers, and Armstrong-ism all have a "truth" that changes.

This means that the teachings of such religions of 100 years ago .


The teachings Im pointing to would be the real big teachings...

>the very teachings that got Joe Smith shot...
>the teachings that Pastor Russel taught about the return of christ.
>The teachings of Armstrong about the united States in the bible....
>The teachings of miller on the date for the return of Christ...etc....

These are the things that the different churches sprang forth from,,,the core teachings that gave birth to the whole movements....the totally essential teachings.

[RealFakeHair]

Are you saying Christian churches don't change their teachings? What about the teaching that women can't be leaders in the church? Does your church teach the exact same things as the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd century church?


Also, weren't you the one who asked what one would do if after studying the Bible they came to a different understanding of a teaching than the leadership of the church taught that they could either try and change the leaderships teaching or leave the church and go to one that taught the way they now believed? What is the difference there?

Why do you compare the old abomination christian churches to the everlasting once and for all true church of Joseph Smith jr imaginary mind?
Remember it was ol jo excuse to come up with the LDSinc. because all other churches had changed over the past 1700 years!

[alanmolstad]

so lets look at each of these religions and see what has been going on?

Mormons:....what was the one thing that Smith pushed that was actually the main thing that kick-started his new religion?..."sex"

It was this desire to have sex with younger girls that became the flag pole that gathered many of Smith's early believers to his side.
the desire to have sex with different girls, younger girls, and this to be done openly and with nothing your wife could do against it.

JWs, and Russel.....what was the one thing that kick-started the JWs?.....The date for the return of Christ,
if you check in the history of the JWs what you learn is that Russel got a huge following due to a very successful campaign he had, where he went from town to town preaching about the predicted date for the return of christ and the end of the world.

Armstrong, the thing H Armstrong had going that got so much attention was that he taught that England and America were talked about in the Bible.


Miller is the biggest name in the whole "End Times" movement that was the start of the 7th dayers...
They also had a date set for the return, and even went so far as to put on the right clothes and stand outside for the return to happen on the predicted date.



these guys all had clear teachings that were core to their movements...they were the things that drew in the people under their tent....

all are forgotten teachings now...

[Apologette]

http://www.mrm.org/gospel-principles


When I talk to a member of a Cult, one of the things you notice is that when the other person starts to see something that they did not know before, they race back to their Cult's leadership to find the answer.

They never race to the bible.

They dont trust their own ability to read and understand the Bible, that is because the Cult leadership has taught them that the order of things is - God, to the Cult leaders, to You....

this is why when a member of a Cult starts to see for themselves and starts to see that they cant trust the Cult's leaders, they also start to feel like a boat without an rudder.
They dont know where to turn to for guidance because they have come to always see their leadership as God's only "channel" for truth.

The problem is that the member of the Cult is even more so dependent on the leadership for truth because the so-called 'truth" that the Cult teaches has a nasty tendency to change from time to time.

This ability for the taught truths to change overnight makes the members of the Cult that much more so dependent on the leadership for truth.

They dont dare stop looking to the Cult for truth because they never know when a new truth is about to come out.

And this problem in rational thinking is explained here:

http://www.ex-cult.org/General/lifton-criteria

[alanmolstad]

http://www.ex-cult.org/General/lifton-criteria


I admit it was a bit of a challenge for me to read and understand as I went along....But in the end I noted how much agreement I had with this work....

[Phoenix]

The teachings Im pointing to would be the real big teachings...

>the very teachings that got Joe Smith shot...
>the teachings that Pastor Russel taught about the return of christ.
>The teachings of Armstrong about the united States in the bible....
>The teachings of miller on the date for the return of Christ...etc....

These are the things that the different churches sprang forth from,,,the core teachings that gave birth to the whole movements....the totally essential teachings.

Why couldn't someone include "The teachings of the 1st-century apostles about the return of Christ"?
Don't some people claim that Christianity changed, amended, this teaching, like the JW's had to do?

[alanmolstad]

The thing that kick-started the Christian church, and still drives it forward to this day was "Paul" and the "new Covenant'

It was Paul and his outreach to non-Jews under the authority of Jeremiah 31:31-34 that moved "The Way" from being just another small addition to the greater Jewish faith, into being the truly new wine the Bible talks about.

Even to this day, the whole of the Christian faith hangs of this idea that we now live under a New Covenant, not of Law or works ,but of Grace though faith.

[alanmolstad]

In the same way, the one idea that kick-started the Mormon religion is the "Harem"

This idea of "many wives" is the thing that was the most important teaching that Joe Smith came up with.
It twisted it's way into the lives of his followers, and was the thing that caused Smith to be finally gunned-down.


Although the fact that it is against the law in this country lead to it being hushed in the modern church,
The idea of the "Harem" is still the driving force behind many of the modern Mormon off-shoot branches of the church, and is also the driving force behind the building of the many large Mormon temples as well as serves as the dream of Mormon men when the think of what the afterlife will be like.


With Mormons going all the way back to Smith himself, you see this same common idea of the harem as being the one thing that this Cult is all about.

[Snow Patrol]

In the same way, the one idea that kick-started the Mormon religion is the "Harem"

This idea of "many wives" is the thing that was the most important teaching that Joe Smith came up with.
It twisted it's way into the lives of his followers, and was the thing that caused Smith to be finally gunned-down.


Although the fact that it is against the law in this country lead to it being hushed in the modern church,
The idea of the "Harem" is still the driving force behind many of the modern Mormon off-shoot branches of the church, and is also the driving force behind the building of the many large Mormon temples as well as serves as the dream of Mormon men when the think of what the afterlife will be like.


With Mormons going all the way back to Smith himself, you see this same common idea of the harem as being the one thing that this Cult is all about.

"serves as the dream of Mormon men when the think of what the afterlife will be like."

That is just so completely wrong that it is pathetic that you would write that. Are you able to interview and ask every LDS person if this is their dream? I can answer you that it is not my dream. You lost a lot of respect with that comment my friend.

[Phoenix]

"serves as the dream of Mormon men when the think of what the afterlife will be like."

That is just so completely wrong that it is pathetic that you would write that. Are you able to interview and ask every LDS person if this is their dream? I can answer you that it is not my dream. You lost a lot of respect with that comment my friend.
It is not the dream of anyone I know, to the best of my knowledge. But we should perhaps give Alan some slack regarding the posts of his that happen to be inflammatory. At least not all of his posts are inflammatory and insulting. Sometimes, he makes a sincere, considerate, not-very-biased post, and it's not just the LDS whom he insults. He seems to point his weapons at enemies of the LDS fairly often. Maybe it just depends on the day of the week, or something--Monday, criticize the LDS, Tuesday, criticize the anti-LDS, etc. :)

[alanmolstad]

Ideas.

I like to talk about ideas, theology, religious history and teachings.

I'm not so much interested with the personal stuff.
But people sure love that stuff.
When their gas tank of ideas runs dry they can always drop-back to the personal stuff.

[alanmolstad]

It is not the dream of anyone I know, to the best of my knowledge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU

harem talked about at -
:18 seconds
:47 seconds
:59 seconds
and at
3:12
5:42


What I think has become clear is that this desire to have their own harem is what is behind the building of Mormon temples today, and was the thing that kick-started the faith in the first place.

[Snow Patrol]

harem talked about at -
:18 seconds
:47 seconds
:59 seconds
and at
3:12
5:42


What I think has become clear is that this desire to have their own harem is what is behind the building of Mormon temples today, and was the thing that kick-started the faith in the first place.

You are not seriously using that as your basis for your argument. If so, oops there goes the rest of any respect I had for you. Seriously, is it your belief that I should go to exchristian.net for true and unbiased accounts of being Christian? Should I turn to Modalist sites for info on the Trinity? You really need to do a little more research and asking live LDS what their motivations are for being LDS because having a "harem" is absolutely NOT on the radar. You really do look foolish saying stuff like that.

[alanmolstad]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU

harem talked about at -
:18 seconds
:47 seconds
:59 seconds
and at
3:12
5:42


What I think has become clear is that this desire to have their own harem is what is behind the building of Mormon temples today, and was the thing that kick-started the faith in the first place.

im reasonably sure that at each time i listed the video is talking about the Mormon Harem teachings....

I note no one disagrees with the information in the video...LOL

[Snow Patrol]

im reasonably sure that at each time i listed the video is talking about the Mormon Harem teachings....

I note no one disagrees with the information in the videontoo...LOL

Because everyone pretty much discounts it. I went through it years ago and it was such a waste of time. I found an equal amounts of lies, exagerations, and truths.

What are your thoughts on me looking at ex-christian sites for info on Christian churches?

[alanmolstad]

then i should go over point by point the listings i gave to confirm they are true......

now my first link was at :18 seconds.........is the video correct here?

[alanmolstad]

so lets listen to the video at the :18 seconds point....and hear the clear introduction of a Mormon Harem teaching...

Now we need to answer the question " Was this ever taught in the Mormon church?"

[alanmolstad]

now if you believe that the harem claim at 18 seconds is a total lie? and that you would never belong to a church that taught such a crazy thing?......then i dont think we will need to stop here long as it should be easy to prove one way or the other...

[alanmolstad]

i would like to get to checking out the next claims of a Mormon harem i listed by times....so what is your answer to the 1st one at :18 seconds?

[alanmolstad]

So the first thing I listed from the video that talks about the Mormon harem idea happens at :18 seconds of the video.
Lets play the video and listen to the thing that i think is teaching that the Mormons push the harem idea and see if this is something you think is a clear lie or not?


[QUOTE=alanmolstad;154245]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU

Ok, I just listened again to the part around the :18 sec point, and the video is saying that an unnamed God and "one of his goddess wives..."

This a clear teaching about a harem from the Mormons.

Now is this a true thing?....

[alanmolstad]

is it true?

[Snow Patrol]

is it true?

NO.

Please quote official LDS sources that teach this principle.


I have to say... I wish Figbearingthistle was around a little longer. I guess his style didn't have a big enough impact on you. You keep saying how respectful he was in his dialogue and treatment of others. You have had two LDS posters here tell you your claim about our dreams is wrong. Yet you continue to believe an anti-Mormon propaganda film that was even denounced by the Tanners. Like I said, you are just losing respect left and "write".

[alanmolstad]

NO.

.

Good...Im glad you feel that way.
I know I would never belong to a church that taught such a crazy idea.....and if a minister in my church ever started teaching such a screwy idea I have him tossed out on his ear, right?

[alanmolstad]

Now the next linking to the Mormon harem idea i think comes at the 47 seconds point of the video...

lets take a moment and listen to that again and see what its saying there?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU

[alanmolstad]

So at this next part of the same video (around:47 seconds) it says that the Mormons believe that there is a god called "Elohim" who lives with "his wives"

So is this true?

[James Banta]

So at this next part of the same video (around:47 seconds) it says that the Mormons believe that there is a god called "Elohim" who lives with "his wives"

So is this true?

Yes.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

Yes.. IHS jim

I dont know Jim...It kinda seems like a crazy idea that there ever could be a religion that teaches there is a God with a harem of many wives...

Has any Mormon ever came out with an idea like this, about there being other gods?, and that they could be married to more than one wife?


Seems kinda crazy....

[James Banta]

I dont know Jim...It kinda seems like a crazy idea that there ever could be a religion that teaches there is a God with a harem of many wives...

Has any Mormon ever came out with an idea like this, about there being other gods?, and that they could be married to more than one wife?


Seems kinda crazy....

It is crazy.. That is why we are here. The LDS have these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell. We are here to tell them about the truth and show them where to learn His ways.. IHS jim

[Snow Patrol]

So at this next part of the same video (around:47 seconds) it says that the Mormons believe that there is a god called "Elohim" who lives with "his wives"

So is this true?


Alanmolstad, if you want to have a serious discussion, I'm up for that. But, if you'd rather keep referring to documented trash then you'll be talking to a wall.

[alanmolstad]

It is crazy..
Im seeing that...

Now back to my video ...

Now at the 3:10 point of the video they list by name a mormon and credit him with a totally crazy teaching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU


They list a Mormon by name, and say that he taught that Jesus had a harem and got his wives knocked-up and that he also said that Joe Smith claimed to be one of the offspring in the family tree of Jesus!

(Yes I know that's all a bunch of crazy ideas, but lets push on...)

Is this true, did this named Mormon really teach this?

[alanmolstad]

I think we just saw everyone prove my point!

Truth in a Cult can change....a leader can say a new truth and everyone has to switch and believe it,
then the next leader of the Cult comes around and says all that stuff the past leader said was not "official" and bingo, we got yet another new teaching!


one day smith is getting gunned down for having sex with other married women because he thought it the most important thing in his faith, and the next moment that whole idea is put aside.....


truth changes.....


so in other words.
The things a Mormon feels are worth dieing for today, will in time be denied were ever all that important at all to the Mormons in the future....

[RealFakeHair]

I think we just saw everyone prove my point!

Truth in a Cult can change....a leader can say a new truth and everyone has to switch and believe it,
then the next leader of the Cult comes around and says all that stuff the past leader said was not "official" and bingo, we got yet another new teaching!


one day smith is getting gunned down for having sex with other married women because he thought it the most important thing in his faith, and the next moment that whole idea is put aside.....


truth changes.....


so in other words.
The things a Mormon feels are worth dieing for today, will in time be denied were ever all that important at all to the Mormons in the future....
Kinda like the changes in ObamaCare!

[alanmolstad]

Kinda like the changes in ObamaCare!
yes, kinda like when the Cult of the JWs were predicting the date for the end of the world/return of christ....the date would draw close and the JW's were saying how great this was going to be for them.

then the date came near, and the Jws had to delay the date it happened..

then that new date came and the had to delay it again...

Then that date drew near and the JWs changed and said, "Who made that prediction?, we never did"

[RealFakeHair]

yes, kinda like when the Cult of the JWs were predicting the date for the end of the world/return of christ....the date would draw close and the JW's were saying how great this was going to be for them.

then the date came near, and the Jws had to delay the date it happened..

then that new date came and the had to delay it again...

Then that date drew near and the JWs changed and said, "Who made that prediction?, we never did"
I believe all cults have one thing it common, they so easily forget their mistakes.

[Snow Patrol]

I think we just saw everyone prove my point!

Truth in a Cult can change....a leader can say a new truth and everyone has to switch and believe it,
then the next leader of the Cult comes around and says all that stuff the past leader said was not "official" and bingo, we got yet another new teaching!


one day smith is getting gunned down for having sex with other married women because he thought it the most important thing in his faith, and the next moment that whole idea is put aside.....


Hmmmm, you'd kind of think that if it was due to his supposed philandering that his death would have come from someone within the church rather than from outside the church becuase of the political threat that the church and Joseph presented.



so in other words.
The things a Mormon feels are worth dieing for today, will in time be denied were ever all that important at all to the Mormons in the future....

Another hmmmmmmm??? So beliefs aren't ever supposed to change? When Moses laid down the law that was it? Never any changes allowed?

[RealFakeHair]

Quote Snow Patrol: his supposed philandering.
Are you saying, good ol jo never fooled around?

[James Banta]

Hmmmm, you'd kind of think that if it was due to his supposed philandering that his death would have come from someone within the church rather than from outside the church becuase of the political threat that the church and Joseph presented.

Another hmmmmmmm??? So beliefs aren't ever supposed to change? When Moses laid down the law that was it? Never any changes allowed?

No the Law is still the Law.. No man save Jesus was ever able to keep it.. Not one.. That includes Snow Patrol.. Yet there it is the same Law Moses was given on the mountain by God.. I have seen many a LDS tell me that the festivals and feasts commanded by God are no longer required. That the sacrifices have been removed as being an important point of the Law. I never saw Jesus or the Apostles say that. All the requirements of the Law remain in place just as they did when God first required them of the Children of Israel. If anything they are more stringent now than they ever were. God Told Moses that we should do no murder.. Jesus said that we shouldn't even allow ourselves to get angry. For in that anger we are murderers.. Did that change the command not to murder, did requiring us not to lust change the commandment not to commit adultery? Seems to me that such an enhancement looks to the root of those sins. These are not a change but instead a look at the cause and not just the effect.. But in so doing the Law Jesus gave us becomes that much more impossible to keep..

The Law has not then changed, it is still there to be a schoolmaster for us and to condemn those that are faithless, refusing to learn from it and come in repentance to Jesus for forgiveness. Tell me when was it that Smith saw the evil of polygamy (Jacob 2:24) and turned away from it? Can an abomination before God somehow become righteousness? Is it ever going to be possible for stealing to become the means that righteousness is measured? Tell me then how can anything such as polygamy that is an abomination before God become a measure of righteousness before that same Holy God? The only way that can happen is for men to change the Law of God to suite them.. Remember God doesn't change (Mal 3:6)..

The LDS in changing their commandments (adding the 89th section as a commandment instead of a word of wisdom) even their understanding of the nature of God (Adam God).. Today the LDS church leadership has represented that the body of the Church should listen and give respect only to the living prophet. That all proceeding men that held the office haven't the same authority in their words than the present leader. That even the scriptures have less authority than the living prophet.. Such thinking as that brought the LDS church into cult status. That is the Denial that God has always been God, that There are three Gods and not one God. That Jesus is not eternally God but became a God after being born in a pre-earth life to a Mother and Father in heaven. These changes from the Universal Faith of the true Christian has come about because a man is honored and respected more than the infallible word of God.. IHS jim

[Snow Patrol]

No the Law is still the Law.. No man save Jesus was ever able to keep it.. Not one.. That includes Snow Patrol.. Yet there it is the same Law Moses was given on the mountain by God.. I have seen many a LDS tell me that the festivals and feasts commanded by God are no longer required. That the sacrifices have been removed as being an important point of the Law. I never saw Jesus or the Apostles say that. All the requirements of the Law remain in place just as they did when God first required them of the Children of Israel. If anything they are more stringent now than they ever were. God Told Moses that we should do no murder.. Jesus said that we shouldn't even allow ourselves to get angry. For in that anger we are murderers.. Did that change the command not to murder, did requiring us not to lust change the commandment not to commit adultery? Seems to me that such an enhancement looks to the root of those sins. These are not a change but instead a look at the cause and not just the effect.. But in so doing the Law Jesus gave us becomes that much more impossible to keep.

The Law has not then changed, it is still there to be a schoolmaster for us and to condemn those that are faithless, refusing to learn from it and come in repentance to Jesus for forgiveness.

If the law has not changed and we are still under the Mosaic Law, with all the festivals, feasts, and scrifices still in effect, then why do we not see a single Christian or Christian church trying to keep these things? I can see not being able to keep all of them but I don't see any Christian person or church trying to keep any festival, feast, or sacrifice.

[Phoenix]

It is crazy..
It is crazy to tell people that "God has a harem of many wives" is a doctrine of the LDS church.


That is why we are here. The LDS have these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell.
If "God has a harem of many wives" is NOT a doctrine of the LDS church, then falsely broadcasting the false claim that it is a doctrine of the LDS church, will **** you to hell...or will God forgive that instance of bearing false witness against the LDS?


We are here to tell them about the truth and show them where to learn His ways..
If you are here to tell the truth, but instead of doing that you tell the lie that it's a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives, then who, really, is failing to learn His ways?

[James Banta]

It is crazy to tell people that "God has a harem of many wives" is a doctrine of the LDS church.


If "God has a harem of many wives" is NOT a doctrine of the LDS church, then falsely broadcasting the false claim that it is a doctrine of the LDS church, will **** you to hell...or will God forgive that instance of bearing false witness against the LDS?


If you are here to tell the truth, but instead of doing that you tell the lie that it's a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives, then who, really, is failing to learn His ways?

Reference to a doctrine that God has more than one wife and is thereby a polygamist was taught by the highest of LDS authority.. Brigham Young taught:


When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, He came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken... HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom we have to do (J. of D., Vol. 1, p. 50)


Young confirmed that polygamy was the religion practiced in Heaven:


Why do we believe in and practice polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to his servants in a revelation given to Joseph Smith, and the Lord's servants have always practiced it. And is that religion popular in heaven? It is the only popular religion there . . . (Deseret News, August 6, 1862)


Is God not included? Is He a God?


The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 269, August 19, 1866).


If President Young wasn't a false prophet then the Father is Heaven is either a Polygamist or He is not a God.. It is true that God's marital status is not on the lips of the brethren very much in this day, but such has been taught throughout LDS history.. The idea that God has more than one wife was a common LDS belief in the early days of the Church.. If that doctrine was true when did the Father divorce most of His wives?

You denial of the teaching of Young and Pratt show your willingness to accept revisionist history OR deny the calling of these men as prophets, seers, and revelators.. If Young and Pratt were false then because the authority of those offices came through them your present President of the church has no divine authority at all.. Their priesthood is a priesthood of mere men not of God.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

The question is a simple, yes/no one:

"IS it a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?"

The answer to that question is either "yes" or "no."

You say it is "yes." I, and virtually all the people who are members of the LDS church you will ask, say it is "no."

Either you are telling the truth, or virtually all the people who are members of the LDS church, are telling the truth.

Is it really unclear what the correct answer is?

[alanmolstad]

on the road , Kumdo fighting tonight with the guys........talk later

[John T]

The question is a simple, yes/no one:

"IS it a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?"

The answer to that question is either "yes" or "no."

You say it is "yes." I, and virtually all the people who are members of the LDS church you will ask, say it is "no."

Either you are telling the truth, or virtually all the people who are members of the LDS church, are telling the truth.

Is it really unclear what the correct answer is?

Ask the wrong question, and you will ALWAYS get the wrong answer.

We both know that nailing you guys on a particular doctrine is like nailing jello to the wall. We also know the reason for that is because like a lime green jello salad, your LDS doctrines shift like the tide. What ewas taught yesterday is not taught now, but will be resurrected in 30 years or so, Therein lies the fallacy of your question.

The PROPER question to ask is "Do the quotes that James provided prove his thesis that thing represent what the LDS leasders taught?" The answer is a resounding "yes".
So stop playing games and deal with the facts because your illogical attempt of a pathetic re****al is now exposed.

[James Banta]

If the law has not changed and we are still under the Mosaic Law, with all the festivals, feasts, and scrifices still in effect, then why do we not see a single Christian or Christian church trying to keep these things? I can see not being able to keep all of them but I don't see any Christian person or church trying to keep any festival, feast, or sacrifice.

That is because Christian churches, unlike the LDS church, look to Jesus to keep the Law for us.. We take His offered imputed righteousness therefore in Him we have kept all the Laws. We have kept the required feasts, and sacrifices through Him.. I don't know how many times that I have been belittled by LDS for teaching imputed righteousness even though I have shown the reference direct from the Bible (Romans 4:22-24). If you deny imputed righteousness you must be trying to gain your own? If that is the case you must keep the whole of the law. That includes the feasts, and the sacrifices.. No one can claim righteousness by keeping the commandments if they dismiss even one of God's commandments.. IHS jim

[Snow Patrol]

That is because Christian churches, unlike the LDS church, look to Jesus to keep the Law for us.. We take His offered imputed righteousness therefore in His we have kept all the Laws. We keep the required feasts, and sacrifices through Him.. I don't know how many times that I have been belittled by LDS for teaching imputed righteousness even though I have shown the reference direct from the Bible (Romans 4:22-24). If you deny imputed righteousness you must be trying to gain your own? IHS jim

Sounds appealing. In all honesty, what this sounds like is that you are a Christian couch potato. Nothing is required of you. You can sit on the couch and do nothing and you are saved.

I was lead to believe that after being born-again that sanctification was the process of becoming more like Christ and more easily obeying the law.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this concept. I can see the appealing aspect of it. There is no responsibility on the individual.

[Phoenix]

Ask the wrong question, and you will ALWAYS get the wrong answer.
Make a false statement, and you will ALWAYS run the risk of being questioned on it.

In this case, Jim said "The LDS have these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell."
Which of us LDS has this "crazy" idea? How many people does he think are currently in danger of being ****ed to hell if they don't abandon this idea before they die?


We both know that nailing you guys on a particular doctrine is like nailing jello to the wall.
Ah, so you are joining Jim in falsely stating that it IS a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives.
Tell me where on the church's website, which states its doctrines, you found this doctrine. Because I haven't seen it there. And if it's not there, and can't be "nailed down" as a doctrine of the LDS church, then why should I or anyone else believe your and Jim's claim that it IS a doctrine of the LDS church?

How did YOU manage to nail it down, if it can't be nailed down? You have done what you yourself claim to be impossible?


We also know the reason for that is because like a lime green jello salad, your LDS doctrines shift like the tide. What ewas taught yesterday is not taught now, but will be resurrected in 30 years or so, Therein lies the fallacy of your question.
So you are admitting that it is NOT a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives...but you're prophesying that in the 2044, it will be?

Then you and Jim don't need to be accusing us of having this "crazy" idea until 2044? So if you accuse the LDS church of having this doctrine now, you're bearing false witness?

Deal with those issues.

[James Banta]

In a Solemn ***embly held in the Salt Lake temple, President George Q, Cannon said "there are those in this audience who are descendants of the old 12 Apostles and, shall I say it, yes, descendants of the Savior himself. His seed is represented in this body of men." (A Ministry of Meetings: The Apostolic Diaries of Rudger Clawson, edited by Stan Larson, Signature Books, 1993, p.71-72).

Yes it is a crazy idea but it was one believed among the LDS of that day. Even though it is not spoken of in the Church these teaching of their prophets survive and tell the strange story of there being people today walking among men that have the blood of Jesus in their veins.. No matter what a LDS says about this the proof of it being taught inside mormonism is undeniable.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

So R. Clawson wrote in his diary that G.Q. Cannon said, over 100 years ago, that Jesus was married and that his wife had a child.......


...........


and that proves that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives ?????


I don't follow your reasoning.


..........

[James Banta]

So R. Clawson wrote in his diary that G.Q. Cannon said, over 100 years ago, that Jesus was married and that his wife had a child.......

and that proves that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives ?????

I don't follow your reasoning.

Really? You were never told? Apostles of the LDS church have clearly said that Jesus was the bridegroom at the wedding feast in Cana, and that both Mary and Martha were His wives.. Are you now speaking against the teachings of Apostles of the LDS church? IHS jim

[Phoenix]

Really?
Yes, really. I really am failing to follow your reasoning.


You were never told?
Told what--that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?

I was never told that by anyone except you, and maybe a couple other "people determined to make the LDS look as crazy as possible, whatever it takes" as far as I can remember.


Apostles of the LDS church have clearly said that Jesus was the bridegroom at the wedding feast in Cana, and that both Mary and Martha were His wives..
Are you referring to Orson Pratt in "The Seer," which was clearly stated to have NOT been church doctrine, and was clearly stated to have been only Pratt's opinion based on Pratt's speculation?

I am still failing to see your reasoning by which you made the "false" witness that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives.


Are you now speaking against the teachings of Apostles of the LDS church?
It seems like maybe you are speaking against the teachings of the other 11 apostles, plus the first presidency, since they said that Pratt's "teachings" were NOT church doctrine. I, like virtually all other LDS who know about this subject, am agreeing with those 14 leaders, plus with Pratt himself, since Pratt later admitted, publicly, in a public announcement, that his speculations should not have been construed to be church doctrine.

[RealFakeHair]

If the law has not changed and we are still under the Mosaic Law, with all the festivals, feasts, and scrifices still in effect, then why do we not see a single Christian or Christian church trying to keep these things? I can see not being able to keep all of them but I don't see any Christian person or church trying to keep any festival, feast, or sacrifice.
Ah, the Law did not change, Jesus fulfill the Law.

[James Banta]

Yes, really. I really am failing to follow your reasoning.


Told what--that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?

I was never told that by anyone except you, and maybe a couple other "people determined to make the LDS look as crazy as possible, whatever it takes" as far as I can remember.


Are you referring to Orson Pratt in "The Seer," which was clearly stated to have NOT been church doctrine, and was clearly stated to have been only Pratt's opinion based on Pratt's speculation?

I am still failing to see your reasoning by which you made the "false" witness that it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives.


It seems like maybe you are speaking against the teachings of the other 11 apostles, plus the first presidency, since they said that Pratt's "teachings" were NOT church doctrine. I, like virtually all other LDS who know about this subject, am agreeing with those 14 leaders, plus with Pratt himself, since Pratt later admitted, publicly, in a public announcement, that his speculations should not have been construed to be church doctrine.

Pratt was one of the apostles I was speaking of, yes. Others were Jedediah M. Grant who said that "the reason Jesus was crucified was because of His polygamy" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 345-46), and Orson Hyde who said "It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; ... no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the least of it." Brigham Young taught that "Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee, that Mary, Martha, and others were his wives, and that he begat children. (Deseret News, August 16, 1862 vol. 2, p. 210).

The evidence is overwhelming that LDS leaders believed and taught that Jesus was a married man, and much more a polygamist.. It would appear that Pratt was only teaching the common doctrine of the church.. Tell me did God change between then and now? Maybe yours does the God of the Bible does NOT (Mal 3:6). IHS jim

[Phoenix]

So, regarding the question "IS it a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?"

are you claiming it is a doctrine of the church, but the leaders and the members don't think it is?

Or are you claiming it is a doctrine of the church, and the leaders and the members know it is a doctrine of the church, but they believe it's a false, yet official, doctrine?

If you ask every LDS person here the above question, and they all say "No, it's not a doctrine of the church," what does that tell you?

And if you were to ask the leaders the question, and they all said "No, it's not a doctrine of the church," is there anything that would convince you that it's not a doctrine of the church?

Why do you keep talking about some leader's opinion about JESUS being married, and using it as if it were evidence that your claim is true about it being a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?

That is a big part of what I am not seeing as making sense in your accusation.

[Phoenix]

And speaking of Jesus: It is not a doctrine of the LDS church that Jesus got married to Mary or Martha or anyone else while He was living among the Jews from about 1 AD to about 33 AD.

You can search through the doctrines for the next week, and you will not find it stated as a doctrine. Just like you will not find any "God has a harem of many wives" listed as a doctrine of the LDS church.

So again, who is the one with "these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell" ?

[RealFakeHair]

And speaking of Jesus: It is not a doctrine of the LDS church that Jesus got married to Mary or Martha or anyone else while He was living among the Jews from about 1 AD to about 33 AD.

You can search through the doctrines for the next week, and you will not find it stated as a doctrine. Just like you will not find any "God has a harem of many wives" listed as a doctrine of the LDS church.

So again, who is the one with "these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell" ?
So we must ***ume that when your prophet speaks, he isn't speaking for the LDSInc. god?

[James Banta]

Sounds appealing. In all honesty, what this sounds like is that you are a Christian couch potato. Nothing is required of you. You can sit on the couch and do nothing and you are saved.

I was lead to believe that after being born-again that sanctification was the process of becoming more like Christ and more easily obeying the law.

I'm trying to wrap my head around this concept. I can see the appealing aspect of it. There is no responsibility on the individual.

I see, if you refuse to believe the word of God it isn't the truth.. I didn't say "Jim says that God must do all the work for his salvation". I said that I believe the scripture that says that..


Romans 4:22-25
And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.



But instead of believing God, or studying until God teaches you the concept you say that you are "trying to wrap you head around this concept".. You see this as cheep grace, you called it "couch potato Christianity"? Yet though the Apostle we are told that our salvation is NOT of Works and yet in the same breath God tells us that we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which He has before ordained that we should walk (Eph 2:10).

Unlike the LDS church which used less than 1% of it's income to ease the misery of the poor the christian church use at least 25% of their for that purpose.. Your ***umption that because we look to Jesus for our righteousness and salvation that we do nothing is just another false belief of mormonism.. You have many.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

So, regarding the question "IS it a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?"

are you claiming it is a doctrine of the church, but the leaders and the members don't think it is?

Or are you claiming it is a doctrine of the church, and the leaders and the members know it is a doctrine of the church, but they believe it's a false, yet official, doctrine?

If you ask every LDS person here the above question, and they all say "No, it's not a doctrine of the church," what does that tell you?

And if you were to ask the leaders the question, and they all said "No, it's not a doctrine of the church," is there anything that would convince you that it's not a doctrine of the church?

Why do you keep talking about some leader's opinion about JESUS being married, and using it as if it were evidence that your claim is true about it being a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?

That is a big part of what I am not seeing as making sense in your accusation.

What is a harem?

Harem
a group of women ***ociated in any way with one man or household (Dictionary.com) It was the only definition there that wasn't about Islam or animal behavior..

How many women make up a group, 2, 3, 4, more.. I say that even two is a group. But the doctrine of plural marriage isn't resisted to 2.. If a man was living in polygamy most men had many more than 2.. But since there were many more men in all of the Utah Territory than there were women most men were unmarried.. The rich men within the church kept most of the women for themselves.

So I have to say that if the women involved in polygamy aren't ***ociated with one man then the term harem would be false. If they are it is accurate. And I do believe that today's LDS church has turned from it all the while believing that Smith is a prophet and the 132nd section of the D&C is a revelation from God..

The men that taught that Jesus was married and had children were the Apostles of the LDS church. They were held to be specual witnesses of Jesus. They spoke from a position of authority. They like Peter, John, and Paul spoke the word of God as they addressed the Church.. The New Testament still teaches the same doctrines as those Apostles. It has for over 2000 years. yet within 50 years Polygamy changes fro being an abomination before God to a requirement for salvation and then less than 75 years later became an abomination again.

God was taught to be a polygamist and today even by your words such a doctrine is denied.. This is an example of the shifting sand on which mormonism is built.. I have proved that the leadership of the LDS church taught that Jesus was married. I have shown where they have said he had children. That may not be enough for you because you believe that these "Prophets" were speaking by their own authority. I say that when such statements are made to the whole of the LDS church in conference, after being approved by the First Presidency, that they are doctrine.. Don't tell me that men spoke in conference without their words being either approved or countermanded by the President of the LDS church weren't teaching official doctrines.. Yes I know that today such teaching would never be spoken but that doesn't change the fact that they were.. AND GOD doesn't change (Mal 3:6) IHS jim

[James Banta]

It is crazy to tell people that "God has a harem of many wives" is a doctrine of the LDS church.


If "God has a harem of many wives" is NOT a doctrine of the LDS church, then falsely broadcasting the false claim that it is a doctrine of the LDS church, will **** you to hell...or will God forgive that instance of bearing false witness against the LDS?


If you are here to tell the truth, but instead of doing that you tell the lie that it's a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives, then who, really, is failing to learn His ways?

The 132 section of the D&C disagree with you.. Statements of your own apostles and prophets disagree with you.. Since 1843 God has been thought to have many wives which He used to help create billions on billions of spirit children. Unless you want to argue with the logic again taught through another hymn often recited in sacrament meetings across the whole of mormonism.


O My Father
I had learned to call thee Father,
Thru thy Spirit from on high,
But, until the key of knowledge
Was restored, I knew not why.
In the heav'ns are parents single?
No, the thought makes reason stare!
Truth is reason; truth eternal
Tells me I've a mother there.

Your denials keep exploding on the truth that is taught as doctrine by historic mormonism.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

So, to summarize: If you re-define "God" to be "Jesus during His time on Earth as a mortal"

and if you re-define "harem" to be
"a group of women ***ociated in any way with one man or household"

and you re-define "church doctrine" to be

"any speculative opinion on any subject that was made by any leader,"

then the untrue mess that comes out of your blender can be transformed into

"It's a doctrine of your church that God has a harem of many wives."


Wow. And this is supposed to p*** for "fair, balanced, true, accurate, reliable description of a church's doctrine" ?
Is there any way you could have twisted things to make a more untrue description of what is and isn't church doctrine? I am trying to think of what more you could have done to re-define things and make a more false description. But I don't know that I will be able to come up with anything.

[James Banta]

So, to summarize: If you re-define "God" to be "Jesus during His time on Earth as a mortal"

and if you re-define "harem" to be
"a group of women ***ociated in any way with one man or household"

and you re-define "church doctrine" to be

"any speculative opinion on any subject that was made by any leader,"

then the untrue mess that comes out of your blender can be transformed into

"It's a doctrine of your church that God has a harem of many wives."


Wow. And this is supposed to p*** for "fair, balanced, true, accurate, reliable description of a church's doctrine" ?
Is there any way you could have twisted things to make a more untrue description of what is and isn't church doctrine? I am trying to think of what more you could have done to re-define things and make a more false description. But I don't know that I will be able to come up with anything.

WHAT IS CONFERENCE FOR? The remarks of these "apostles" weren't made while they were setting the table, or doing some gardening. These remarks were made as they instructed the church IN CONFERENCE. That makes these statements official church teachings.. Just as official as anything that will be taught in conference on the 5th and 6th of the upcoming month.. Many LDS complain that we want to take ever word that was ever uttered by the LDS leadership and make it official teachings and therefore the doctrine of the church. That isn't what we do at all. We take ONLY the official word spoken by the leadership as they deliver it over the pulpit in conference, or in their writings, as what is the official doctrine of the church.. What could be more fair than that..

I stand by all the recorded words of the Lord. Did he say other things, I would have to say He did but I can only hold what He said and had revealed through all His prophets and Apostles before and after His mortal ministry.. I am willing to hold only the remarks of LDS leaders to their official teachings, their books, and their addresses to the membership as were ***igned by the president of the church..

It has been shown that a doctrine that God has many wives was/is held by the LDS church and taught by more than one of it's leaders. It has been shown what the definition of the word harem is, as is defined from the dictionary (Dictionary.com).. Because the statements made of God's marital status were made officially and because of the definition of harem it is correct to say that it's a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives. That was not invented by those that look for error inside mormonism it was taught by it's own leaders..

I agree that such a doctrine is twisted but I wasn't the one that put the toque on those doctrines. The twisting was done and continues to be accomplished by LDS leaders. Today they want to come across as being more normal so the are playing a game that these really STRANGE teaching never existed and they are just as Christian as all other sects of Christianity.. But still they step in the garbage that is mormonism as President Hickey did as he denied faith in the Traditional Christ. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

I am somewhat sorry to have to break this news to you, James, but using your twisted definitions, it is a doctrine of YOUR church that Jesus had a harem of many wives.

The New Testament teaches that Jesus ***ociated with women in some way or other.

You defined harem as "a group of women ***ociated in any way with one man."

[James Banta]

I am somewhat sorry to have to break this news to you, James, but using your twisted definitions, it is a doctrine of YOUR church that Jesus had a harem of many wives.

The New Testament teaches that Jesus ***ociated with women in some way or other.

You defined harem as "a group of women ***ociated in any way with one man."

I twisted it? You say that and it is your church that has written as part of it's scripture that:

D&C 132:1-6
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 and wives and concubines-
Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
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.
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.
For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were ins***uted from before the foundation of the world.
And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was ins***uted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be ****ed, saith the Lord God.

That proves that such a doctrine that was "ins***uted from before the foundation of the world." Since we hadn't lived it in the preexistence it must have existed with God from before the foundation of the world.. It is you religion not my faith that approves the sin of polygamy. It is your sin to explain to God that you put the sin of polygamy on His Son.

I used the only non islamic, non animal definition in the dictionary for the word harem.. I think it is a bit weak too but It again wasn't my choice of a definition. BUT, it is still a dictionary definition.. You don't like it too bad.. The way I would say it is that they would have to be ***ociated as in marriage, but I try to stay honest in my posts and not add meaning to what my sources say. IHS jim

[James Banta]

And speaking of Jesus: It is not a doctrine of the LDS church that Jesus got married to Mary or Martha or anyone else while He was living among the Jews from about 1 AD to about 33 AD.

You can search through the doctrines for the next week, and you will not find it stated as a doctrine. Just like you will not find any "God has a harem of many wives" listed as a doctrine of the LDS church.

So again, who is the one with "these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell" ?

It was testified by good honest men that it was an LDS prophet that taught such things before the leaders of the church in the Salt Lake Temple. It was members of the LDS 12 apostles that spoke in conference say that it was Jesus that was the bridegroom at the marriage feast in Cana. That He had married both Mary and her sister Martha.. "These crazy ideas that will **** people to hell", are of LDS origin.. IHS jim

[alanmolstad]

It is you religion not my faith that approves the sin of polygamy. It is your sin to explain to God that you put the sin of polygamy on His Son.


This is very true.....The warning in the scripture for what Smith has done and the other Mormon teachers that gave this teaching into their church is clear.....They will burn for it.

[alanmolstad]

What is a harem?

anytime that "Mr Zipper" is part of the story (as was with Smith as well as with many Mormon households over the years) the term "Harem" is appropriate.

Basicly what you have with the Mormon Church from the start and going right up to today is a "Sex-Crazy" cult.

Sex is the very foundation of why there is a Mormon church, and it is the main driving force behind the church to this very day.

This allure of spending the afterlife being consumed in endless sex with multiple partners is the real reason for the building of the large Mormon temples.

The abuse of younger girls sexually was the reason old Joe Smith got shot.
And that is fitting, as it had become the driving force in his life.

[alanmolstad]

[B......But still they step in the garbage that is Mormonism as President Hickey did as he denied faith in the Traditional Christ. IHS jim

It was to men such as found in Mormonism that the words of Jesus right so true...."I never knew you"


They think that by their many "works' that have found favor with God, but these are the same "works" that condemn them to Hell.

Mormons busy themselves with things that keep them from turning to the true Jesus that they migh have life...

But as they stand unrepentant, they remain condemned....as condemned as all who have turned their back on the One true God to follow after the words of men who tickled their ears with wild stories of an afterlife filled with sexual trysts.

[Phoenix]

anytime that "Mr Zipper" is part of the story (as was with Smith as well as with many Mormon households over the years) the term "Harem" is appropriate.

Did you forget the question? Here it is, just in case you forgot:

"IS it a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives?"

If you and James answer "Yes, it IS" but it really ISN'T, then you and James are guilty of bearing false witness, and you will burn for it, according to the Bible.


Basicly what you have with the Mormon Church from the start and going right up to today is a "Sex-Crazy" cult.

Are you saying that the kingdom of Israel, led by Yahweh, was a sex-crazy cult?


The abuse of younger girls sexually was the reason old Joe Smith got shot.
You can back that accusation up with the required evidence, right? On the other hand, I guess if you're determined to burn, it doesn't matter how many times you bear false witness in one post.

[Phoenix]

It was testified by good honest men that it was an LDS rophet that taught such things before the leaders of the church in the Salt Lake Temple.

I am surprised to discover that you are unbiased enough to admit that there were good, honest men in the LDS church.

[alanmolstad]

yes, the Mormons believe that Mormon men can become gods....That alone is enough to condemn them to hell for all eternity.

the Mormons also believe that in their afterlife they get to have sex with many wives...this also puts them in the same basket with the Arabs that have the same type of kooky ideas about 70 virgins...

It's a big bag of dog **** if you ask me....

[alanmolstad]

Are you saying that the kingdom of Israel, led by Yahweh, was a sex-crazy cult?


.
Im saying that the MORMON CHURCH is founded and based really on this issue of being able to cheat on your wife openly.

I saying that the more honest you get a Mormon to tell you of their teachings and the reason for the temple and the real life of what Smith was into, the more you find that "SEX" is the center of the conversation.

[alanmolstad]

Im also saying that as a person gets sucked into the mormon CULT that they will start to bring out this idea of cheating on one's wife more and more....untill the point where you are talking openly about being married in heaven and banging away with other women than the wife you got now...

[alanmolstad]

You can back that accusation up with the required evidence, right? On the other hand, I guess if you're determined to burn, it doesn't matter how many times you bear false witness in one post.Just how old was he at the time?....LOL

if you want to jot down the ages of the many wives the ally cat had?....just Google it.,(or on my case use BING)....you should be able to find many links to get the required information...search "Wives of Joseph smith, mormon" Im sure there is a webpage all set up to show you their ages.

I remember that James here on this forum has already posted a link a while back that had all the stuff to deal with this issue.....

[Phoenix]

yes, the Mormons believe that Mormon men can become gods....That alone is enough to condemn them to hell for all eternity.
The founder of the Athanasian Creed said that God became man so that men could become gods. Most of the Early Christian Fathers taught it, too, because Jesus taught it according to them and according to the Bible. You are sure judging a lot of good Christians as being condemned to hell for all eternity. What is ironic is that by doing that kind of judging, you are making yourself God, which means that you believe that you can become God. Actually, you believe that you already ARE God, since you're doing His *** of condemning people right now, instead of letting HIM do His *** on Judgment Day.

Shame on you, not only for making false accusations against others, but also for being a hypocrite while making those accusations.

Plus, you are posting red herrings instead of backing up, with actual evidence, your belief that

"it is a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives."

It's almost as if you are begging people to put you on "ignore."

And you keep adding more and more inflammatory, unsupported ***ertions, such as this one:


The abuse of younger girls sexually was the reason old Joe Smith got shot.

Some anti-LDS claim that "Old Joe" (you are aping an epithet that anti-LDS used in the mid-19th century--he was 38 when he was illegally lynched) was killed because he was going to run for President on an anti-slavery platform, and certain pro-slavery people would do anything to prevent that. Other anti-LDS claim that he was killed by anti-LDS who were afraid that if they allowed him to go to trial, he would be acquitted of the treason charges, and they couldn't allow that to happen.

As for your scurrilous theory, you have provided zero evidence to support it being the correct one instead of the other theories.

[alanmolstad]

The founder of the Athanasian Creed .....


Everytime I see that word "Athanasian" I always think of the Stargate.....

and thinking you are going to be "like god" is more than enough to send a person to hell .

it clearly means you dont have a clue as to who you are, who God is, and the whole of what the christian faith is about....

[alanmolstad]

Honestly ., when I hear of any person or any of the CULTs that go around teaching that men can become gods, i think back to what the bible tells us about the goal of satan.

From the start of this dance all satan has wanted to do is be seen as being "like God"
well clearly none of the angels, (fallen or good) could ever be convinced that satan is God almighty....But with men its a different story.

Satan can only be seen in the way he wants to be seen, (as God) by men.
Being "like God" is his aim .....and getting men to desire the same is just a cherry on the cake for satan.

I just look at this whole teaching as being the most truly evil idea that is in all of creation.

No one enters into the Kingdom with this totally screwed up idea of who they are and who god is....



So when I hear this teaching here on the forum,,,I just shake my head and feel sorry for such mixed up people....

[Zeus]

Im saying that the MORMON CHURCH is founded and based really on this issue of being able to cheat on your wife openly.

I saying that the more honest you get a Mormon to tell you of their teachings and the reason for the temple and the real life of what Smith was into, the more you find that "SEX" is the center of the conversation.

Funny, but I have had many honest conversations about Mormonism and I have been in the temple. Sex has never come up in conversation and nowhere have I seen it as a tangential part of a conversation, let alone the center of it. I have also never once heard of a Mormon man say he wanted to be able to cheat on his wife.

I'd say the more I read your posts, alan, the more convinced I am you have no idea what you are talking about. I do think that you seem to gravitate to anything salacious and sensational, since every time I see you claim to not know something about Mormonism, then all of a sudden you claim to have found something salacious and now you claim that new thing you found is the basis for the whole religion.

[alanmolstad]

let me tell you a little story:

It was a while ago....
I think it was somewhere back between 1991 and 94, when I got to teach a cl*** on how to Outreach to the CULTS.
I handled JWs and Ed Decker taught on the Mormons.

Now after he gave the lesson, Mr Decker started answering questions from members of the cl***.
The room was filled with people from different churches and at some point I remember a lady asked a question about a member of her family that was dating a Mormon.

This reminded Mr Decker of a story that had happened to him recently.
A friend from church that he knew invited him over to his house one evening for dinner.
Happy to get to know this person better Ed accepted the invitation.

Now at some point in the pre-dinner conversations that the men were having the host introduced Ed Decker to the young man who was now engaged to his daughter.
The host also made a point of telling Ed in the introductions that the young man was a "Mormon"

At that point Ed realized why he had been invited to dinner by the man from church.
The man was hoping Ed would bring up Mormonism and talk the guy into being a Christian, or to say something to both the boy or his daughter that will end this engagement.

Mr Decker admitted that he felt a little "put out" by not being told of the situation before hand, and was a bit upset with the host for springing this on him like this totally out of the blue.

Well as the evening went on the host of the dinner grew more and more impatient for Ed to get busy and start attacking the Mormons, but Ed did his best to totally avoid the topic all during dinner.

Finally after the dinner the host could not take it any more and introduced the topic himself.
Needless to say it got quiet in the room.
The men were sitting around the living room, and all the women were in the kitchen .

To break the ice Ed just mentioned that the young girl who was engaged must be a good sport about sharing her husband in the after life, due to the fact that it is the desire of Mormon men to have many wives.

Ed said this loud enough that the young girl heard Ed say this and sorta called out in a friendly manner that she was sure that her husband would not have other wives in the after life, due to the fact that "She would be enough for him"

That got the young man to respond back to her in almost a sheepish voice that he would have other wives in the after life as would be expected of his role.

There was a distinct sound in the kitchen heard of some dishes being lowered sharply onto the counter.
The young girl leaned into the living room doorway and asked "What was that?"


That was the end of their engagement!...LOL

Up to that moment the girl did not really understand what was really behind Mormonism, and what was it's driving force....."SEX"
,,,,but with that one comment that Ed Decker had made he was able to make the truth about what Mormonism is personal to the girl.....and she totally rejected it.


as we all should...


this is a true story,

[Zeus]

let me tell you a little story:

It was a while ago....
I think it was somewhere back between 1991 and 94, when I got to teach a cl*** on how to Outreach to the CULTS.
I handled JWs and Ed Decker taught on the Mormons.

Now after he gave the lesson, Mr Decker started answering questions from members of the cl***.
The room was filled with people from different churches and at some point I remember a lady asked a question about a member of her family that was dating a Mormon.

This reminded Mr Decker of a story that had happened to him recently.
A friend from church that he knew invited him over to his house one evening for dinner.
Happy to get to know this person better Ed accepted the invitation.

Now at some point in the pre-dinner conversations that the men were having the host introduced Ed Decker to the young man who was now engaged to his daughter.
The host also made a point of telling Ed in the introductions that the young man was a "Mormon"

At that point Ed realized why he had been invited to dinner by the man from church.
The man was hoping Ed would bring up Mormonism and talk the guy into being a Christian, or to say something to both the boy or his daughter that will end this engagement.

Mr Decker admitted that he felt a little "put out" by not being told of the situation before hand, and was a bit upset with the host for springing this on him like this totally out of the blue.

Well as the evening went on the host of the dinner grew more and more impatient for Ed to get busy and start attacking the Mormons, but Ed did his best to totally avoid the topic all during dinner.

Finally after the dinner the host could not take it any more and introduced the topic himself.
Needless to say it got quiet in the room.
The men were sitting around the living room, and all the women were in the kitchen .

To break the ice Ed just mentioned that the young girl who was engaged must be a good sport about sharing her husband in the after life, due to the fact that it is the desire of Mormon men to have many wives.

Ed said this loud enough that the young girl heard Ed say this and sorta called out in a friendly manner that she was sure that her husband would not have other wives in the after life, due to the fact that "She would be enough for him"

That got the young man to respond back to her in almost a sheepish voice that he would have other wives in the after life as would be expected of his role.

There was a distinct sound in the kitchen heard of some dishes being lowered sharply onto the counter.
The young girl leaned into the living room doorway and asked "What was that?"


That was the end of their engagement!...LOL

Up to that moment the girl did not really understand what was really behind Mormonism, and what was it's driving force.
,,,,but with that one comment that Ed Decker had made he was able to make the truth about what Mormonism is personal to the girl.....and she totally rejected it.


as we all should...


this is a true story,

Ahhhh, an Ed Decker story....that you bought hook line and sinker.

Take any story that puts Mormonism in a bad light, and you are a devout believer in the story, AND, a believer in the "facts" presented in that story.

You show, once again, that you are a novice of Mormonism and will believe anything negative about it and then preach it as fact to others.

Luckily there are still good Anti-LDS out there who are honest enough to actually admit that Ed Decker is a laughing stock of Anti-Mormonism circles.

[alanmolstad]

I don't respond to personal stuff.....the story is true.

[Zeus]

I don't respond to personal stuff.....the story is true.

Given all the other stuff you believe is true, I don't doubt you believe it is true.

:rolleyes:

[alanmolstad]

once again, the story is true....

[Zeus]

once again, the story is true....

:rolleyes:

[Phoenix]

Everytime I see that word "Athanasian" I always think of the Stargate.....
You should study the history of Christianity, and St. Athanasius' prominent place in it.


and thinking you are going to be "like god" is more than enough to send a person to hell .
Have you notified St. John that his thinking, as recorded in the Bible, is more than enough to send St. John to hell? And should he believe your condemnation of him, as if you know more about the subject than he did?

See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.…
(http://biblehub.com/1_john/3-2.htm)

A question for you: Did John just "think" that he was going to be like God? Or did he state that he knew it?

I will direct the rest of your accusations directly to John, since he was claiming that "we will be like God" waaaaay before the LDS ever started to:


it clearly means you (St. John) dont have a clue as to who you are, who God is, and the whole of what the christian faith is about....

Do you feel foolish yet?

[Phoenix]

Funny, but I have had many honest conversations about Mormonism and I have been in the temple. Sex has never come up in conversation and nowhere have I seen it as a tangential part of a conversation, let alone the center of it. I have also never once heard of a Mormon man say he wanted to be able to cheat on his wife.

I'd say the more I read your posts, alan, the more convinced I am you have no idea what you are talking about. I do think that you seem to gravitate to anything salacious and sensational, since every time I see you claim to not know something about Mormonism, then all of a sudden you claim to have found something salacious and now you claim that new thing you found is the basis for the whole religion.

Your observations are beginning to seem valid.

[Phoenix]

Given all the other stuff you believe is true, I don't doubt you believe it is true.
:rolleyes:

Here is another "little story." Reportedly, Ed was a guest on a radio talk show in the 1980s, in Utah. He said some untrue things about LDS doctrines on the air. When they were off the air, the host asked Ed why he thought it was okay to tell lies about Mormonism. He answered "When you're fighting the devil's church, anything goes."

So Alan may have been duped by the guy who contributed to the practice of what is called "lying for Jesus." (Google the phrase)

But at some point, Alan will probably incur some personal responsibility for believing that "it is the desire of Mormon men to have many wives" merely because Ed Decker told him so. There probably will be a day of reckoning in the future.

[James Banta]

I am surprised to discover that you are unbiased enough to admit that there were good, honest men in the LDS church.

Why would you believe otherwise? I have LDS neighbors. They are wonderful people. Shirt off their back kind of people.. Just because we disagree about our faith doesn't change that.. It's sad that we don't know each other better.. I'll bet we could be friends.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

Why would you believe otherwise?
Because of what you and your wife have written about the horrible treatment you got from, it seemed, every single LDS person in your former ward.


I have LDS neighbors. They are wonderful people. Shirt off their back kind of people..
That is good to learn--that perhaps you don't take the bad treatment that you feel you got from a few LDS people, and project it onto all LDS people.

[James Banta]

Because of what you and your wife have written about the horrible treatment you got from, it seemed, every single LDS person in your former ward.


That is good to learn--that perhaps you don't take the bad treatment that you feel you got from a few LDS people, and project it onto all LDS people.

Not at all.. I just have run up against a lot of hyper-spiritual people at the ward.. Here among my neighbors I have had but a few problems.. Those right after I was exed.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Ask the wrong question, and you will ALWAYS get the wrong answer.

We both know that nailing you guys on a particular doctrine is like nailing jello to the wall. We also know the reason for that is because like a lime green jello salad, your LDS doctrines shift like the tide. What ewas taught yesterday is not taught now, but will be resurrected in 30 years or so, Therein lies the fallacy of your question.

The PROPER question to ask is "Do the quotes that James provided prove his thesis that thing represent what the LDS leasders taught?" The answer is a resounding "yes".
So stop playing games and deal with the facts because your illogical attempt of a pathetic re****al is now exposed.

It is strange to me that the LDS will scream and cry about not being subject to words coming from their historic leaded. It was their founder that taught that"

History of the Church Vol 1 page 38
What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth p*** away, my word shall not p*** away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.

If all that the Lord has given to His servants the LDS prophets why wouldn't all that He has revealed through them still in force? The New and everlasting covenant lasted less than 80 years. The united order lasted less than 15 years. The temple ceremony seems to always be in flex.. A temple commanded to be built in far west, and the LDS people commanded to work on it till it be finished was later commanded to be abandon because of the threat from the Missouri State Militia.. Seems all will be fulfilled that is fulfilled and the rest is of what was said to be fulfilled God changes His mind about.. All will not be fulfilled, only what has already happened will be fulfilled.. Does God have many wives, the mormon god does and that is defined by our language as a harem.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Make a false statement, and you will ALWAYS run the risk of being questioned on it.

In this case, Jim said "The LDS have these crazy ideas that will **** them to hell."
Which of us LDS has this "crazy" idea? How many people does he think are currently in danger of being ****ed to hell if they don't abandon this idea before they die?


Ah, so you are joining Jim in falsely stating that it IS a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives.
Tell me where on the church's website, which states its doctrines, you found this doctrine. Because I haven't seen it there. And if it's not there, and can't be "nailed down" as a doctrine of the LDS church, then why should I or anyone else believe your and Jim's claim that it IS a doctrine of the LDS church?

How did YOU manage to nail it down, if it can't be nailed down? You have done what you yourself claim to be impossible?


So you are admitting that it is NOT a doctrine of the LDS church that God has a harem of many wives...but you're prophesying that in the 2044, it will be?

Then you and Jim don't need to be accusing us of having this "crazy" idea until 2044? So if you accuse the LDS church of having this doctrine now, you're bearing false witness?

Deal with those issues.

The crazy idea I was speaking of it that of rejecting the Biblical christian faith. A faith that tells us that there is one God not many.. That by His grace through faith in Jesus we gain the fullness of His salvation. That Jesus is the High priest, and His priesthood endures eternally in Him alone. Yes by all means believe the man Joseph Smith and look to Him and your present prophet. Igore the teachings of the past that PROVE that mormonism has changed evolved to become what it is today.. It was built on lies and retained too many. Even if it were only the belief that God was once a man like us. That he lived a life like the life Jesus lived, they would be teaching a false God.. A god who's nature doesn't reflect the attributes He has true nature as revealed in the Bible..

You have been shown in LDS records where God is said to have more than one wife.. That is polygamy and the wives cons***ute a harem.. You can go back and see the references again.. They are all from LDS sources..I don't believe we have to wait until 2044 to know that God is Spirit, That there is no marriage in heaven. That God created ALL things which includes Hydrogen, Oxygen, and all the rest of the elements on the periodic table.. It is another crazy idea to believe that God is a finite God having not ALWAYS been God but having been a disembodied intelligence, a premortal spirit, a human being and finally an exalted being.. Every single unique LDS doctrine is crazy.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

The crazy idea I was speaking of it that of rejecting the Biblical christian faith.
Then why did you insert your comment into the thread where the context of the ***ertion that LDS doctrine is that "God has a harem of many wives" ???


Yes by all means believe the man Joseph Smith and look to Him and your present prophet.
I realize you defected from the church a long time ago, but Thomas S. Monson is our present prophet. Joseph Smith died in 1844.


You have been shown in LDS records where God is said to have more than one wife..
People can say all kinds of things, but that doesn't automatically make them church doctrine.


.I don't believe we have to wait until 2044 to know that God is Spirit, That there is no marriage in heaven. That God created ALL things which includes Hydrogen, Oxygen, and all the rest of the elements on the periodic table..
You don't have to wait to find out the falsity of your false beliefs. You can pray in faith and ask God, in the name of His Son, about those issues, and if it's good that you find out now, God will let you know now.


It is another crazy idea to believe that God is a finite God having not ALWAYS been God but having been a disembodied intelligence, a premortal spirit, a human being and finally an exalted being.. Every single unique LDS doctrine is crazy..
You think it's a unique LDS doctrine that God used to be a disembodied en***y? Isn't that what you currently believe Him to be--a disembodied en***y?

[alanmolstad]

cuz the mormon teaching of becoming a god and having a harem of wives in the afterlife is built around the skirt-chasing that Joe Smith did in front of and behind his wifs back.

[Phoenix]

cuz the mormon teaching of becoming a god and having a harem of wives in the afterlife is built around the skirt-chasing that Joe Smith did in front of and behind his wifs back.

Cuz you have no real argument, so the best you can do is make up stuff that sounds witty but is actually quite juvenile.

[alanmolstad]

i do not respond to personal stuff

[alanmolstad]

Isn't that what you currently believe Him to be--a disembodied en***y?

Im not sure where Jim would get the idea that anyone in the bible is "disembodied "?
I guess it would depend on the context?

When I die, my spirit goes to be with the Lord (as also happened to the thief on the cross) and my body goes into the ground and becomes part of nature and dirt and plants and stuff.

Im not sure i would use the term "disembodied" to describe what happens to all people.....that seems more like a word that describes a horror movie ...or something from ghostbusters?

I would use the term "away from the body but at home with the Lord' and let that be that...

But this is only for a short term as we see in the life/death and resurrection of Christ.
We will rise as He did out of the ground, and be in new a everlasting body of flesh and bone, and as such we will live with the lord forever....

[James Banta]

[Phoenix;154489]Then why did you insert your comment into the thread where the context of the ***ertion that LDS doctrine is that "God has a harem of many wives" ???

Look up the meaning of doctrine you will fine that it is a reaching of a religion.. A synonym is a belief.. So a doctrine of mormonism, something that is believed by the religion is that God has more than one wife..


I realize you defected from the church a long time ago, but Thomas S. Monson is our present prophet. Joseph Smith died in 1844.

Of he is no longer your prophet why talk about his and being the "Prophet Joseph Smith". Why hold a praise song in your hymnal directed at him? But thank you for pointing out that you thank God for a man that is here to guide you in these later days.. No need for you to deal with God directly you have a man to do that for you..


People can say all kinds of things, but that doesn't automatically make them church doctrine.

No just anyone can stand at the pulpit in general conference and give an address to the church. The speakers are carefully chosen, they talks checked to make sure that they have only approved content.. Everything spoken of in conference is either the approved doctrine or aligns with approved doctrine.. EVERYTHING..


You don't have to wait to find out the falsity of your false beliefs. You can pray in faith and ask God, in the name of His Son, about those issues, and if it's good that you find out now, God will let you know now.

I love the arrogance of members of the LDS church.. They believe that if people would pray they would all fall into line and believe the lies of mormonism and leave behind God truth found in His word.. You seem to believe that people don't even pray for wisdom. That they don't ask God to open His truth to their minds and hearts. That is one of the sheer lies that I have heard all mormons tell.. I don't need to ask God if Jesus is God. I don't need to ask God about animals of life species ***ociating together. And I don't need to ask Him if His children love being with others of the faith..

I have heard many an LDS tell me that people judge them selves and gravitate to the degree of glory where they feel most comfortable. I know that I am not comfortable being around people of a more affluent social relations any more than richer people feel at home in my shabby middle cl*** home..


You think it's a unique LDS doctrine that God used to be a disembodied en***y? Isn't that what you currently believe Him to be--a disembodied en***y?

And you doubt that.. If you do you aren't deep into understanding the "ONE ETERNAL ROUND" are you?

On page 40 of the Teaching of Joseph Smith. He teaches that "God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret." Did the great prophet Thomas S. Monson correct that teaching? If he never addresses it as being in error does that mean that it is still a belief (Doctrine) of the church.. I would think so..

President Young affirmed that teaching of Joseph Smith saying "God the Father was once a man on another planet who p***ed the ordeals we are now p***ing through; he has received an experience, has suffered and enjoyed, and knows all that we know regarding the toils, sufferings, life and death of this mortality." (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young, p29).. I have noticed that Young's teaching on Adam God has been countered by many more resent "prophets" of mormonism. yet the Idea that God has always existed is a common teaching in all of mormonism. They say that and neglect to say that for most of eternity they believe that He wasn't yet God but was an intelligence without even a spirit body, just as they believe they were..

I believe what is said about Him in the Bible.. I believe that He is Spirit. I believe that a spirit has not a body of flesh and bone like we have. I believe that Jesus is the physical image of the invisible God.. I haven't said.."Oh that doesn't seem right, I will make up some other God that I can relate to better. That is what a cultist would do.. Through their mistrust of God, and their doubts that anyone can hold that the Bible still has God's unaltered word contained within it's pages.. Sound like any group you know.. It does to me..

I don't personally know any of the Christian posters here or on any other forum where God, His nature, and ways are discussed that differ with me as to any of those points.. Yes we have differences in baptism, church government, or the timing of the rapture, but on the subject of the nature of God and His salvation we are in complete and total agreement.. IHS jim

[Phoenix]

Look up the meaning of doctrine you will fine that it is a reaching of a religion.. A synonym is a belief.. So a doctrine of mormonism, something that is believed by the religion is that God has more than one wife..

The huge problem with that kind of bad logic is that it's bearing false witness to claim that the speculation or opinion of a member of a group automatically becomes the belief and doctrine of the group.

That's a bit like saying that if a member of the U.S. Senate, such as Harry Reid, is of the opinion that all children of Republicans should be executed, then it's a belief and doctrine of the USA that all children of Republicans should be executed.

[James Banta]

The huge problem with that kind of bad logic is that it's bearing false witness to claim that the speculation or opinion of a member of a group automatically becomes the belief and doctrine of the group.

That's a bit like saying that if a member of the U.S. Senate, such as Harry Reid, is of the opinion that all children of Republicans should be executed, then it's a belief and doctrine of the USA that all children of Republicans should be executed.

Not my opinions but those men that have been closely ***ociated with the presidents of the church.. Execution of our children would be the doctrine of the US Senate if Mr Reid introduced such a bill and through what ever means open to him got it p***ed even if the house later dismissed it.. It is a good thing that Mr Reid isn't that much of a hater to even conceive such a terrible "What if".. No man in the senate would have such power. neither Harry Reid nor President Obama has the force of will over the hearts of men as does the strong central leadership of a cult leader.. So the president of the LDS church does have the power to twist the nature of God.. It has been done before. IHS jim