Derogatory terms part deux

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Here is what Jill posted on the use of derogatory terms. I can't even refer to myself as a Christian as that is misleading because the Walter Martin website takes the position that Mormon theology is not Christian theology. And not only that but addressing other board members as "Mormon" is construed as derogatory.

Jill says the term LDS Christian is misleading and inaccurate, yet in the same post claims the LDS believe God lives ON Kolob with a harem of wives.
The LDS must be doing something right to be getting continually censored and getting their hands tied behind their backs a little at a time.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Jill says the term LDS Christian is misleading and inaccurate, yet in the same post claims the LDS believe God lives ON Kolob with a harem of wives.

The LDS must be doing something right to be getting continually censored and getting their hands tied behind their backs a little at a time.

It tells how more than 120 pioneers, families traveling from Arkansas to California in 1857, were attacked and slaughtered by Mormons at Mountain Meadows, a gr***y oasis in southern Utah.

Most of the victims, which included infants in their mothers' arms, were executed after the travelers surrendered their weapons.

"One reason so few people know about it is that it was very effectively covered up by the Mormon church," Hutton said. "Another reason is nobody in this country likes to criticize religious organizations. It makes people nervous."

Santa Fe resident and former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, great-great-grandson of the only person convicted in the killings, appears in "Mountain M***acre."

So does Ferenc "Frank" Szasz, a UNM professor whose specialty is history of American religion.

"Frank calls the m***acre the greatest act of religious violence on American soil up until the Sept. 11 (2001) terrorist attacks," Hutton said.

As cruel coincidence would have it, the Mountain Meadows executions happened on Sept. 11, 1857.

tie one hand behind your back, oh lets make it two!

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

It tells how more than 120 pioneers, families traveling from Arkansas to California in 1857, were attacked and slaughtered by Mormons at Mountain Meadows, a gr***y oasis in southern Utah.

Most of the victims, which included infants in their mothers' arms, were executed after the travelers surrendered their weapons.

"One reason so few people know about it is that it was very effectively covered up by the Mormon church," Hutton said. "Another reason is nobody in this country likes to criticize religious organizations. It makes people nervous."

Santa Fe resident and former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, great-great-grandson of the only person convicted in the killings, appears in "Mountain M***acre."

So does Ferenc "Frank" Szasz, a UNM professor whose specialty is history of American religion.

"Frank calls the m***acre the greatest act of religious violence on American soil up until the Sept. 11 (2001) terrorist attacks," Hutton said.

As cruel coincidence would have it, the Mountain Meadows executions happened on Sept. 11, 1857.

tie one hand behind your back, oh lets make it two!

Wow....Oooooooooookay.

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Here is what Jill posted on the use of derogatory terms. I can't even refer to myself as a Christian as that is misleading because the Walter Martin website takes the position that Mormon theology is not Christian theology. And not only that but addressing other board members as "Mormon" is construed as derogatory.

Mesenja, I didn't say you personally could not claim to be a Christian--in a debate format you may argue whatever you wish. I said you couldn't use misleading terms like LDS Christian or LDS Christians. The issues here are terminology and context. The general characterization of Latter Day Saints as Christians is inaccurate and misleading.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I wonder if RealFakeHair has a sense of humor. Oh I am so scared at the upcoming response.

I know where you liveeeeeeee. boo!

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Jill says the term LDS Christian is misleading and inaccurate, yet in the same post claims the LDS believe God lives ON Kolob with a harem of wives.

The LDS must be doing something right to be getting continually censored and getting their hands tied behind their backs a little at a time.

Vlad--you got me there--that's what I get for posting late at night. Not on Kolob, then...but I'm sticking to the harem (Doctrine and Covenants 132).

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I am a Christian whether you like it or not. The issue here is that you have no clue as to what you are talking about.

Yeah. I don't believe what Mormonism teaches, but that makes me "Mormon".

Get real, M.

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Zing!!!
You win.

Go ahead and call yourself a Mormon.

I'll continue to call myself a Christian.

You deny Mormonism.

I affirm Jesus Christ as my Savior.

Let the people decide who is more worthy of the ***le they have taken upon themselves.

Which Jesus? The one conceived by the Holy Spirit as the one and only Son of God, Second Member of the Trinity, or Lucifer's brother--most definitely not conceived by the Holy Spirit?

Journal of Discourses 1:50,51, Brigham Young – “The question has been, and is often, asked, who it was that begat the Son of the Virgin Mary . . . .When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost . . . . Now, remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.”


Matthew 1:19-20
"Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Zing!!!
You win.

Go ahead and call yourself a Mormon.

I'll continue to call myself a Christian.

You deny Mormonism.

I affirm Jesus Christ as my Savior.

Let the people decide who is more worthy of the ***le they have taken upon themselves.

(mod edit) They are the only beings in all of creation that try to make themselves look like something they are not.. For they can appear as an angel of light and deceive many. Those that follow them transform themselves into the apostles of Christ they are not following the requirements the Holy Spirit gave for that office in Acts 1:21-22no they take that honor unto themselves by a vote of mere men..

Your Jesus is a creation of a another created being. Neither one an be called the God of the Bible.. For the God of the Bible is a Being who has been God from everlasting and will be so to everlasting.. The mormon god is NOT that God (2 Cor 11:13-14).. IHS jim

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Jill

Which Jesus? The one conceived by the Holy Spirit as the one and only Son of God, Second Member of the Trinity, or Lucifer's brother--most definitely not conceived by the Holy Spirit?

The Jesus conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, the Son of God the Father. He that came to earth, born of the virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, led by example, taught with power and authority of God, gave his gospel, paid the price for my sins, died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later, ascended on high and sits on the right hand of the Father.

So again, if you want to take issue with the silly argument of "which Jesus?", be my guest. Your only recourse as a Mormon-critic is to try and persuade that we believe in a false Jesus. So I understand your need to tread down that beaten path.

[Father_JD]

Why can't you answer HONESTLY??

Why have you EVADED the TRUTH that your "jesus" is Lucifer's "spirit brother"???

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

The Jesus conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, the Son of God the Father. He that came to earth, born of the virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, led by example, taught with power and authority of God, gave his gospel, paid the price for my sins, died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later, ascended on high and sits on the right hand of the Father.

So again, if you want to take issue with the silly argument of "which Jesus?", be my guest. Your only recourse as a Mormon-critic is to try and persuade that we believe in a false Jesus. So I understand your need to tread down that beaten path.

Brigham Young didn't think it was silly, Vlad, he took the time to comment on it.

And for the record, the Jesus of the Mormons does not have the power to take away all of your sins.

Journal of Discourses 4:54, Brigham Young - “It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.”



(Btw, I am a critic of Mormonism, not Mormons.)

[Sentinus]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Sure! Of course the problem with your ****ogy is that you want to be called a Mormon, and yet go around telling everyone that Mormonism is wrong and its leaders and tenants are false.

Mormons go around telling people they are Christians and tell them why they believe Jesus Christ is TRUE, the Savior of the world, the Redeemer, Son of God, etc....

Most people with common sense will see the difference in someone who calls themself one thing but professes another and someone who calls themself one thing and verifies it by word and deed.

One thing I have found to be true in life is that common sense does not exist, that which one determines is common can easily be considered uncommon by another.

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Jill

Brigham Young didn't think it was silly, Vlad, he took the time to comment on it.

Well, sure. I agree with BY that the HG is not the one that conceived JC. It was through the power of the HG, but the Father is literally the father.

And for the record, the Jesus of the Mormons does not have the power to take away all of your sins.

Really? Does YOUR Jesus have the ability to take away all of YOUR sins? What about the sin against the Holy Ghost? No? You mean there is at least 1 sin that your Jesus won't forgive you for?

(Btw, I am a critic of Mormonism, not Mormons.)

Yes, we LDS have heard that song many times.

[Sentinus]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Well, sure. I agree with BY that the HG is not the one that conceived JC. It was through the power of the HG, but the Father is literally the father.



Really? Does YOUR Jesus have the ability to take away all of YOUR sins? What about the sin against the Holy Ghost? No? You mean there is at least 1 sin that your Jesus won't forgive you for?





Yes, we LDS have heard that song many times.

Define "literally" and the process by which you believe this occurred..

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Sentinus

Define "literally" and the process by which you believe this occurred..

Literally, as in, Jesus received half of his chromosomes from the Father, not the HG.

How it occurred? Miracle. I don't know. Critics like you will tell people that the Father had sex with Mary. But of course critics like you will also NEVER prodice ONE quote that states that. Not one person has ever produced a quote to state that "God had sex with Mary". So I don't plan on running down that rabbit trail either.

[Sentinus]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Literally, as in, Jesus received half of his chromosomes from the Father, not the HG.

How it occurred? Miracle. I don't know. Critics like you will tell people that the Father had sex with Mary. But of course critics like you will also NEVER prodice ONE quote that states that. Not one person has ever produced a quote to state that "God had sex with Mary". So I don't plan on running down that rabbit trail either.

No need we can all read what was said by "prophets seers and revelators" and allow each to judge for him or her self. However, like I have been told so many times before when discussing Joseph Smiths behavior by LDS, "you must consider the context and social climate". While no quote may be found containing what you have said it is clear that at some point it was readily accepted that Mary was one of Elohims plural wives and that he begat Jesus just as we are begotten. Lately LDS apologists have tried to redefine the intent of "the brethren's" word choice to avoid the uncomfortable conclusion anyone reading can clearly see.

I indeed understand your desire to avoid this rabbit hole (I would too if I were still LDS), and since I believe it will get us no where I agree to move on.

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Literally, as in, Jesus received half of his chromosomes from the Father, not the HG.

How it occurred? Miracle. I don't know. Critics like you will tell people that the Father had sex with Mary. But of course critics like you will also NEVER prodice ONE quote that states that. Not one person has ever produced a quote to state that "God had sex with Mary". So I don't plan on running down that rabbit trail either.

Here are the quotes, Vlad:

Journal of Discourses 8: 116; J of D 8: 211; J of D 8: 115; Mormon Doctrine p.546-547.

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Jill

Here are the quotes, Vlad:

Journal of Discourses 8: 116; J of D 8: 211; J of D 8: 115; Mormon Doctrine p.546-547.

care to post the quotes, not just the references?

And do any of them say that God had sex with mary?

[Sentinus]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

care to post the quotes, not just the references?

And do any of them say that God had sex with mary?

OK lets see if you will answer this seriously...

Vlad how exactly were you begotten? Before you answer make sure you understand that you need to answer as if you were around in the middle 19th century, a time period where our scientific knowledge was slim to none regarding genetics, and procreation. When your past leaders spoke everyone understood clearly what was being taught..

Within this context of 19th century thought without apologetic armor it was clearly taught and is STILL taught by many in Bishopric and Stake Presidency members that God had Physical intercourse with his wife Mary to procreate Jesus. This I have heard admitted by many LDS people in unabashed ways. I even asked one Stake pres how he felt about the idea that God artificially inseminated Mary without the use of sexual intercourse. He was shocked that any LDS member would embrace God ( A glorified man) ignoring natural laws that He was governed by to produce (Sire) His only begotten son.. Now I am ok with you not believing it, but clearly there is reason for non LDS to question this teaching. BTW I thought you weren't interested in going down this rabbit hole. How much value or stock do you put in personal diaries and journals that catalog LDS teaching on this matter?

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

care to post the quotes, not just the references?

And do any of them say that God had sex with mary?

The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood - was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers. -JD 8:115 Brigham Young

In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Saviour Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it.
JD 8:211 - p.212, Heber C. Kimball, September 2, 1860

"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers." -Bruce McConkie

I know that most LDS do not believe this, anymore (that Jesus was "naturally" begotten, but it seems to have been a belief of early Mormons, and even much later, up until very recently, this belief seems to have been fairly common.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Libby

I know that most LDS do not believe this, anymore (that Jesus was "naturally" begotten, but it seems to have been a belief of early Mormons, and even much later, up until very recently, this belief seems to have been fairly common.

Is it any wonder why the Tanner's re-named their book to, "The Changing World of Mormonism"??

Not really, huh?

[Jill]

Originally Posted by Libby

I know that most LDS do not believe this, anymore (that Jesus was "naturally" begotten, but it seems to have been a belief of early Mormons, and even much later, up until very recently, this belief seems to have been fairly common.

That may be true, but unfortunately most LDS do not run their church or approve its doctrine. It's the official Church Doctrine that determines what Mormonism is--not the people.

I remember when we were going through the Mormon temple in Oakdale, Minnesota a few years ago. They flew in a high level Mormon from Salt Lake for the opening, and he met with the area pastors and gave them a tour. We questioned him in front of everyone there about Joseph Smith's doctrine--he was trying to present Mormonism as Christian--and he came out and said unequivocally that we did not need to believe in Joseph Smith to be Mormon. I'm not kidding. You should have seen the shock on the faces of the Mormons standing next to him. Unbelievable. But then, he was only answering the question I should have asked.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Jill

That may be true, but unfortunately most LDS do not run their church or approve its doctrine. It's the official Church Doctrine that determines what Mormonism is--not the people.

I remember when we were going through the Mormon temple in Oakdale, Minnesota a few years ago. They flew in a high level Mormon from Salt Lake for the opening, and he met with the area pastors and gave them a tour. We questioned him in front of everyone there about Joseph Smith's doctrine--he was trying to present Mormonism as Christian--and he came out and said unequivocally that we did not need to believe in Joseph Smith to be Mormon. I'm not kidding. You should have seen the shock on the faces of the Mormons standing next to him. Unbelievable. But then, he was only answering the question I should have asked.

Wow. You have got to be kidding! If one doesn't believe in or have a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet...there is no Mormonism. That's truly shocking. Just when I think I have heard it all...

[Jill]

Not kidding, honest. It was like something from the Twilight Zone.