Religion built upon a god who failed.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Why is it you believe that Jesus was baptized?

basically the answer is as with the cross too.

That though faith in him we receive his righteousness.



So the question "Why did he need to be baptized if he was without sin?"is just as off-base as asking "Why did he have to die like a sinner when he was sinless?" for these types of questions miss the mark as to why Jesus did such things on our behalf.



This is very much connected with the idea that Jesus did not come to this Earth to destroy the Law, rather he said that he came to "fulfill" the law.

So who did he fulfill the Law for?.........Us!

Its the same when confronted by John at the baptism and he said that he must "fulfill all righteousness"
This "righteousness" he speaks of is ours though faith in Him!

[Christian]

mickey posted:

Yeah....I didn't give you scripture, you have a tendency to ignore it lol.

Never once. You do have a tendency to prevaricate about that tho. . .

I gave scripture verses in direct response to your Isaiah verses like I told you I would. It was a big response, and even provided a link to the thread when you asked why I wasn't responding, you never said one word about it,

So far I have seen NO RESPONSE, NO HONEST DISCUSSION ABOUT Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 where the God of the BIBLE says HE IS THE ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE; HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW OF ANY OTHERS. Yet in joey smith's pgp abraham 3, YOUR god claims to meet with OTHER gods to determine WHICH of your gods will 'organize the earth,' THEN joey's garbage goes on in chapter 4 to repeat 'and they (that is the gods. . .)' over and over again.

TOTAL CONTRADICTION between joey smith's 'gods' and the ONLY GOD, the GOD OF THE BIBLE.

IF you had the guts to try to HONESTLY DISCUSS the differences, I would CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED.

I have on some of your other comments too (just recently I was trying to discuss a scripture with you and you stopped responding)...I do try, but it's a lot of effort to go through when nobody addresses them. I'm not being rude, just being honest.

When you falsely claim that I don't respond, it makes it less likely that I will WANT to respond next time.

But that's ok Christian, I'm used to your responses, not a big deal

Now you admit that I DO respond. Not very consistant, are you.

I understand your fervent intense testimony. I truly do. I appreciate that The Savior has changed your life, you've born witness to that a few times. And I know you're not a "Hey look at me I'm a Christian!" Christian by the way you carry a simple cross around your neck next to your heart as a reminder of our Savior's sacrifice and what that means to you personally (I was touched by that) I have experienced that great change as well, my life was quite literally in the gutter when I completely handed it all over to Him, He LITERALLY saved my life (both temporal and spiritual) I do know how that makes someone fiercely protective of their beliefs, so I can be prone to being snide with my responses...but I truly don't like to do that, I'll try to keep the snarkiness to a minimum, it's not productive.

If that is an apology, your apology is accepted. I do know that you do believe the false religion you have been conned by; you are convinced and sincere in your belief.

So then you believe there are no leaders or an organized church, just certain Christian churches, but not all Christian churches? I'm just simply trying to get a good bead on what your beliefs are.

Each congregation has its eldership (ADULT leaders, not 12 or 19 year old kids), pastors, deacons, deaconesses, etc. No 'central corporation' was set up by Jesus Christ beyond HIMSELF and His Apostles (of which you have none)

My beliefs are that Christ established a church unified in congregations that were separated by locations but not by doctrinal differences...but it was still one organized church. With Jesus at the head, His twelve apostles (one of which was replaced when Judas left) and other leaders ordained with priesthood authority...as found in the Bible
Ephesians 2:20

No 'priesthood authority' there.

Luke 10:1

Jesus sent out 70 missionaries BEFORE HIS CRUCIFIXION. They were NOT 'positions in the church' since His church had not yet been built. No 'priesthood authority' in CHRIST'S CHURCH there either.

Ephesians 4:11-13

Jesus set up His original church. The Apostles were still alive. Joey smith's religion wasn't there.

All the rest of those things will be found in our Evangelical Christian churches.

Matthew 16:19

God gave PETER the keys to HIS CHURCH, Peter used them to open the church at Pentecost. Just because joey smith PRETENDED TO HAVE 'KEYS' does NOT MAKE what joey smith claimed become True.

John 15:16

JESUS chose His people, we didn't choose HIM. Ephesians 1 tells us HE chose US before the beginning of the world.

Of course this p***age HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "priestly authority" within Christ's church EXCEPT THAT JESUS IS IN CHARGE.

Luke 9:1-2

Jesus sent out His 12 Apostles with power and authority over all demons and to cure deseases. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about your manmade 'priesthood authority' within His church which had NOT BEEN BUILT AT THAT TIME.


Etc...These are a few, I don't have time to list the full scripture, I can do so later.

SO FAR you have not offered ONE SCRIPTURE that allows for or builds the 'priesthood authority' joey smith invented within your own organization. YOU HAVEN'T EVEN DEMONSTRATED THAT JOEY SMITH EVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH GOD.

I do have ONE question for you. Do you believe every single man who has handled and translated the bible (and the doctrine that has been handed down from it) was ABSOLUTELY perfect? (Like Christ perfect) and made NO mistakes? That they were completely infallible?

OF COURSE NOT. BUT the originals (autographs) were, and many many multiple copieists and type-setters wouldn't all make the same mistakes.

Do YOU believe joey smith was ABSOLUTELY PERFECT? OR that the original printing of the bom was perfect? Were THEY completely infallible?

Again, not fighting, just a sincere question. Thanks~

​Likewise.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Erundur

Then why do Protestants insist that they're different?

The God of the Catholic and Protestant believer is real...its the true God of the Bible.

However everything even slightly connected to Mormonism is tainted and false.
So not only is Joe Smith's teachings on his god false, all his point of views on Christian denominations is also tainted and false.

So that is why you cant really ask a Mormon "What type of God do Catholics and Protestants believe in?", as they get their answers from the tainted source of Smith's invented ideas about the Catholic and Protestant churches.




So to review:
The god of Smith was just a bunch of silly ideas that Smith came up with on his own that tended to slant his other teachings into supporting his authority over other people who put their trust in him, as well as giving him a means to share the affections of other women besides his own wife.



and that's why they shot him.....

[theway]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

basically the answer is as with the cross too.

That though faith in him we receive his righteousness.



So the question "Why did he need to be baptized if he was without sin?"is just as off-base as asking "Why did he have to die like a sinner when he was sinless?" for these types of questions miss the mark as to why Jesus did such things on our behalf.



This is very much connected with the idea that Jesus did not come to this Earth to destroy the Law, rather he said that he came to "fulfill" the law.

So who did he fulfill the Law for?.........Us!

Its the same when confronted by John at the baptism and he said that he must "fulfill all righteousness"
This "righteousness" he speaks of is ours though faith in Him!

Darn.... My post got deleted....

Bottom line is you are wrong!

The righteousness spoken of is willingly being submissive to all covenants, ordinances and commandments that the Father had commanded of men. Christ could not be an exception to those commandments of the Father (this has the same connotation as Christ washing the Disciples feet) even if it was His own will to do so. (Think Christ in the Garden) Christ had to submit to the Father's Will.

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by Christian

mickey posted:

Yeah....I didn't give you scripture, you have a tendency to ignore it lol.

Never once. You do have a tendency to prevaricate about that tho. . .

I gave scripture verses in direct response to your Isaiah verses like I told you I would. It was a big response, and even provided a link to the thread when you asked why I wasn't responding, you never said one word about it,

So far I have seen NO RESPONSE, NO HONEST DISCUSSION ABOUT Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 where the God of the BIBLE says HE IS THE ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE; HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW OF ANY OTHERS. Yet in joey smith's pgp abraham 3, YOUR god claims to meet with OTHER gods to determine WHICH of your gods will 'organize the earth,' THEN joey's garbage goes on in chapter 4 to repeat 'and they (that is the gods. . .)' over and over again.

TOTAL CONTRADICTION between joey smith's 'gods' and the ONLY GOD, the GOD OF THE BIBLE.

IF you had the guts to try to HONESTLY DISCUSS the differences, I would CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED.

I have on some of your other comments too (just recently I was trying to discuss a scripture with you and you stopped responding)...I do try, but it's a lot of effort to go through when nobody addresses them. I'm not being rude, just being honest.

When you falsely claim that I don't respond, it makes it less likely that I will WANT to respond next time.

But that's ok Christian, I'm used to your responses, not a big deal

Now you admit that I DO respond. Not very consistant, are you.

I understand your fervent intense testimony. I truly do. I appreciate that The Savior has changed your life, you've born witness to that a few times. And I know you're not a "Hey look at me I'm a Christian!" Christian by the way you carry a simple cross around your neck next to your heart as a reminder of our Savior's sacrifice and what that means to you personally (I was touched by that) I have experienced that great change as well, my life was quite literally in the gutter when I completely handed it all over to Him, He LITERALLY saved my life (both temporal and spiritual) I do know how that makes someone fiercely protective of their beliefs, so I can be prone to being snide with my responses...but I truly don't like to do that, I'll try to keep the snarkiness to a minimum, it's not productive.

If that is an apology, your apology is accepted. I do know that you do believe the false religion you have been conned by; you are convinced and sincere in your belief.

So then you believe there are no leaders or an organized church, just certain Christian churches, but not all Christian churches? I'm just simply trying to get a good bead on what your beliefs are.

Each congregation has its eldership (ADULT leaders, not 12 or 19 year old kids), pastors, deacons, deaconesses, etc. No 'central corporation' was set up by Jesus Christ beyond HIMSELF and His Apostles (of which you have none)

My beliefs are that Christ established a church unified in congregations that were separated by locations but not by doctrinal differences...but it was still one organized church. With Jesus at the head, His twelve apostles (one of which was replaced when Judas left) and other leaders ordained with priesthood authority...as found in the Bible
Ephesians 2:20

No 'priesthood authority' there.

Luke 10:1

Jesus sent out 70 missionaries BEFORE HIS CRUCIFIXION. They were NOT 'positions in the church' since His church had not yet been built. No 'priesthood authority' in CHRIST'S CHURCH there either.

Ephesians 4:11-13

Jesus set up His original church. The Apostles were still alive. Joey smith's religion wasn't there.

All the rest of those things will be found in our Evangelical Christian churches.

Matthew 16:19

God gave PETER the keys to HIS CHURCH, Peter used them to open the church at Pentecost. Just because joey smith PRETENDED TO HAVE 'KEYS' does NOT MAKE what joey smith claimed become True.

John 15:16

JESUS chose His people, we didn't choose HIM. Ephesians 1 tells us HE chose US before the beginning of the world.

Of course this p***age HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "priestly authority" within Christ's church EXCEPT THAT JESUS IS IN CHARGE.

Luke 9:1-2

Jesus sent out His 12 Apostles with power and authority over all demons and to cure deseases. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about your manmade 'priesthood authority' within His church which had NOT BEEN BUILT AT THAT TIME.


Etc...These are a few, I don't have time to list the full scripture, I can do so later.

SO FAR you have not offered ONE SCRIPTURE that allows for or builds the 'priesthood authority' joey smith invented within your own organization. YOU HAVEN'T EVEN DEMONSTRATED THAT JOEY SMITH EVER HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH GOD.

I do have ONE question for you. Do you believe every single man who has handled and translated the bible (and the doctrine that has been handed down from it) was ABSOLUTELY perfect? (Like Christ perfect) and made NO mistakes? That they were completely infallible?

OF COURSE NOT. BUT the originals (autographs) were, and many many multiple copieists and type-setters wouldn't all make the same mistakes.

Do YOU believe joey smith was ABSOLUTELY PERFECT? OR that the original printing of the bom was perfect? Were THEY completely infallible?

Again, not fighting, just a sincere question. Thanks~

​Likewise.

I didn't say you don't respond...I said you don't usually respond to my scripture, I wasn't trying to be rude. And I was trying to be funny about your responses when I said I was used to them...just stating that I understand your intensity...I don't think I conveyed that very well. I was sincerely trying to open a dialogue and show respect for your testimony and beliefs. I know there's a nice guy in there, what do I need to do to bring him out? I'm not trying to fight and bicker, I'm really not. And I'm not being facetious or condescending either (discussing through written word loses all inflection) I'm discussing my take on doctrine and scripture and inquiring about yours, that's all.

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

basically the answer is as with the cross too.

That though faith in him we receive his righteousness.



So the question "Why did he need to be baptized if he was without sin?"is just as off-base as asking "Why did he have to die like a sinner when he was sinless?" for these types of questions miss the mark as to why Jesus did such things on our behalf.



This is very much connected with the idea that Jesus did not come to this Earth to destroy the Law, rather he said that he came to "fulfill" the law.

So who did he fulfill the Law for?.........Us!

Its the same when confronted by John at the baptism and he said that he must "fulfill all righteousness"
This "righteousness" he speaks of is ours though faith in Him!

I know He had to suffer to atone for our sins, and I understand that satisfied the law of sacrifice. I don't believe He suffered for our sins because He had sin....He had to be sinless to be the perfect sacrifice. But He did nothing save God commanded it. I understand that what He did, He did for us, but again it was because The Father commanded Him to. I believe one of the main purposes of Christ's mission was to provide us with a perfect example of humility, love and obedience.

So, His baptism was like the crucifixion...it was done to fulfill righteousness so we wouldn't have to?

Why do you believe others were baptized, and commanded to be baptized?

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

and that's why they shot him.....

Please don't tell me he deserved to die....Do you believe he deserved to die?

[MickeyS]

Christian said

So far I have seen NO RESPONSE, NO HONEST DISCUSSION ABOUT Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 where the God of the BIBLE says HE IS THE ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE; HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW OF ANY OTHERS. Yet in joey smith's pgp abraham 3, YOUR god claims to meet with OTHER gods to determine WHICH of your gods will 'organize the earth,' THEN joey's garbage goes on in chapter 4 to repeat 'and they (that is the gods. . .)' over and over again.

TOTAL CONTRADICTION between joey smith's 'gods' and the ONLY GOD, the GOD OF THE BIBLE.

IF you had the guts to try to HONESTLY DISCUSS the differences, I would CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED.

I really shouldn't have said what I did, I was kinda trying to be funny, and failed miserably. But Christian, if you could please let me know what I can do to show you I am interested in a sincere discussion, I would appreciate it. I'm trying to tell you why I believe what I believe and asking you what you believe as well. I'm really trying. So just let me know what I'm missing that you'd like to see. Thank you, sincerely... I'm trying to put that word in there as much as possible to let you know I am NOT being sarcastic or facetious...I'm really not.

http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/s...a-christ/page4
See post #76

http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/s...he-truth/page4
Post #77-80

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Please don't tell me he deserved to die....Do you believe he deserved to die?

Joe Smith was a full grown man, and one of his so-called "wives"was a little 14 year old girl.
Think about it...


Enough said...


(Some people just need shooting)

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Joe Smith was a full grown man, and one of his so-called "wives"was a little 14 year old girl.
Think about it...


Enough said...


(Some people just need shooting)

Ok....do you know if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with this girl?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Ok....do you know if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with this girl?

would that make a difference to you?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Ok....do you know if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with this girl?

would that make a difference to you?


Here is a story.

Not long ago a guy named "Jim"and another guy named "Billy" used to post here all the time.
They seemed to always end up in the very same debate over the sex life of Smith with the same nice Mormon lady that also used to post here very often.

Jim and Billy used to say that Smith had many wives.
The nice Mormon lady condemned this idea and said it was all lies from the Anti-Mormon factions who left the Mormon church and are now just very bitter.

I was reading the posts, and the same old arguement was going back and forth, and then Jim started to press the nice Mormon lady on the question of "What if?"
They were asking her "What if Smith did have many more wives?"
"What if some of the wives were under age?"
"What if it was a sexual incounter he was engaged in with the underage girls?"

I think Jim and Billy wanted the nice Mormon lady to state that if it ever came out that Smith had more than one wife, or if it came out that he had sex with underage girls, that she would stop believing in his testimony and consider the Christian church anew.

But....try as they might, Jim and Billy could never get the nice Mormon lady to state that she would quite the Mormon church if it ever came out he had more than one wife, or had sex with underage girls he called is "wife"


Then....one day....

I had a person who was a guest, who is Mormon, but also was married to a Christian, and this person wrote to me a Private Message and told me that a change had happened to the standard teaching about Smith and the issue of "other wives".

I did not really know what to make of this...But Jim and Billy did!

And we never really saw that nice Mormon lady around the forum anymore.

She had openly stated over and over that the idea that Smith had other women was only an Anti-Mormon lie, to the point that it must have been too much of a shock to now try to defend that very same idea she had attacked others for holding...






Now we skip ahead in time to today.
The Mormons I run into now are very open and proud of the other women that Smith had.
But they also know that there is a big problem getting people to look the other way when the issue of a little 14 year old child comes up.
Mormons know full well that its hard to put a better "spin" on the idea of a full grown man taking a little girl into his bed to perform sex with..

So the current way of putting a better spin on the situation is to ask for proof that all the so-called "Smith marriages" were always sexual?

This defense hinges on the fact that, "We dont have a sex tape of Smith and the little girl" and so the hope is that in this current age of sex tapes being so openly discussed in the media that people will think, "If there is no sex tape,then it did not happen"


That is the defense Im hearing from the Mormons.
Perhaps that is the defense you seek to use now with me?
You can try to use it, after all it's what Im hearing on this forum too from time to time from other Mormons.
So go for it!
Use it!

Thats what Im hearing.
But what Im not hearing , is actually what is speaking louder on this issue.


We are not hearing a direct statement that "SMITH never married a 14 year old little child!"...

We are not hearing, "If it comes out later that Smith did have sex with that little 14 year old girl it would mean his whole testimony was a big lie"



"If it was sexual, he could not have been a true prophet!"



that's what Im not hearing...
The Mormon church is not saying that officially because they know of other shoes left to drop on the matter.

The average Mormon is not saying that to me, because like the nice Mormon lady, they dont want to end up on the wrong side of this should the church suddenly change the official position on the sexual status of Smith's marriages to underage girls.







So I ask you the question again I asked at the top of this:

"Would it matter to you?"




We have already seen firsthand how a teaching long debated was suddenly switched as if it was the same position they had held all along, so I got to wonder what you would think should the official teaching about the sexual natures of Smith's marriages to underage girls start to evolve into openly stating that : "Yes of course it was a normal sexual marriage."



Would that matter to you?

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

would that make a difference to you?


Here is a story.

Not long ago a guy named "Jim"and another guy named "Billy" used to post here all the time.
They seemed to always end up in the very same debate over the sex life of Smith with the same nice Mormon lady that also used to post here very often.

Jim and Billy used to say that Smith had many wives.
The nice Mormon lady condemned this idea and said it was all lies from the Anti-Mormon factions who left the Mormon church and are now just very bitter.

I was reading the posts, and the same old arguement was going back and forth, and then Jim started to press the nice Mormon lady on the question of "What if?"
They were asking her "What if Smith did have many more wives?"
"What if some of the wives were under age?"
"What if it was a sexual incounter he was engaged in with the underage girls?"

I think Jim and Billy wanted the nice Mormon lady to state that if it ever came out that Smith had more than one wife, or if it came out that he had sex with underage girls, that she would stop believing in his testimony and consider the Christian church anew.

But....try as they might, Jim and Billy could never get the nice Mormon lady to state that she would quite the Mormon church if it ever came out he had more than one wife, or had sex with underage girls he called is "wife"


Then....one day....

I had a person who was a guest, who is Mormon, but also was married to a Christian, and this person wrote to me a Private Message and told me that a change had happened to the standard teaching about Smith and the issue of "other wives".

I did not really know what to make of this...But Jim and Billy did!

And we never really saw that nice Mormon lady around the forum anymore.

She had openly stated over and over that the idea that Smith had other women was only an Anti-Mormon lie, to the point that it must have been too much of a shock to now try to defend that very same idea she had attacked others for holding...






Now we skip ahead in time to today.
The Mormons I run into now are very open and proud of the other women that Smith had.
But they also know that there is a big problem getting people to look the other way when the issue of a little 14 year old child comes up.
Mormons know full well that its hard to put a better "spin" on the idea of a full grown man taking a little girl into his bed to perform sex with..

So the current way of putting a better spin on the situation is to ask for proof that all the so-called "Smith marriages" were always sexual?

This defense hinges on the fact that, "We dont have a sex tape of Smith and the little girl" and so the hope is that in this current age of sex tapes being so openly discussed in the media that people will think, "If there is no sex tape,then it did not happen"


That is the defense Im hearing from the Mormons.
Perhaps that is the defense you seek to use now with me?
You can try to use it, after all it's what Im hearing on this forum too from time to time from other Mormons.
So go for it!
Use it!

Thats what Im hearing.
But what Im not hearing , is actually what is speaking louder on this issue.


We are not hearing a direct statement that "SMITH never married a 14 year old little child!"...

We are not hearing, "If it comes out later that Smith did have sex with that little 14 year old girl it would mean his whole testimony was a big lie"



"If it was sexual, he could not have been a true prophet!"



that's what Im not hearing...
The Mormon church is not saying that officially because they know of other shoes left to drop on the matter.

The average Mormon is not saying that to me, because like the nice Mormon lady, they dont want to end up on the wrong side of this should the church suddenly change the official position on the sexual status of Smith's marriages to underage girls.







So I ask you the question again I asked at the top of this:

"Would it matter to you?"




We have already seen firsthand how a teaching long debated was suddenly switched as if it was the same position they had held all along, so I got to wonder what you would think should the official teaching about the sexual natures of Smith's marriages to underage girls start to evolve into openly stating that : "Yes of course it was a normal sexual marriage."



Would that matter to you?

Thank you for asking that question. My testimony does not hinge on who Joseph Smith was married to and why. I do not have all of that information, but I can see how it is a HUGE stumbling block for others. I'm not saying for one second that it wouldn't be, you would be naive to believe it wouldn't be a big deal. I was merely addressing the fact the you stated he deserved to die for his marriage to a 14 year old girl. I was just trying to get to the root of why he needed to die. Is it because of the marriage, or because you thought he was having sex with her...I was just asking. Because death is a pretty harsh judgment for somebody when, like you said, ALL the facts have not been revealed, including WHY he did it, and if he was in fact acting under God's direction. But I can see the contempt simply looking at that.

Now, if you were to find out that Joseph Smith did indeed see God The Father and His Son..that the Book Of Mormon was brought forth from God, and that we are all literal spirit children of a Heavenly Father who has a plan for us...

Would it matter to you?

I'm not clueless and I'm not sitting here with my blinders on....like I said before..I have my own questions regarding church history. And being a non active, non interested member of the church for my entire adult life (until 10 years ago) in a place like Utah...I had little good to say about any of it. And I had read the Book of Mormon before with no intention of believing it...and had little good to say about that either. When I abandoned my sinful life and handed my entire recovery over to God through the atonement of His Son Jesus Christ...and felt that power and grace truly TRANSFORM who I was, I literally became a new person. My memories of those 20+ years feel like they were a previous life, I am never ashamed to give excruciating details of the things I had done because I know they were done by a completely different person. Plus I know also that my desire to be that person again...is GONE. Absolutely gone.

Matthew 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

I can only guarantee you the fruit of what is inside me, the fruit of how I behave, and the fruit of what I desire. I have had my testimony added upon again, and again, and again. (Is my behavior always perfect? I would never claim that it is, but I make daily efforts to walk in The Saviors path...some days are better than others )My blessings have been abundant, and my direction is focused. And the more I continue down this path, the more remote and distant that previous life becomes. I could have sat in my destruction unmoving (because believe me, I was definitely at the end of the path) ruined my own life (however long that life would have been), as well as the lives of my children, it would have been quite easy...but each step I took towards the gospel (which required great effort), The Lord carried me four more. And He continues to do so. And this all came about from gaining and growing a testimony of the gospel and doctrine of Jesus Christ through prayer, study of ALL scriptures, my callings as a Young Women's advisor & Sunday School teacher, as well as doctrinal study and my continued experimentation on my faith, through which I continually receive my evidence. And I know without a doubt....Satan would not have had to go through all this trouble to get me....he already had me.

With all of that being a part of who I am....no, I can't let information on who Joseph Smith was married to alter any of that. I can't destroy what I KNOW to be true....because of something I DON'T know. But I couldn't turn my back on all of what has been confirmed to me time and again...I couldn't. I am confident and comforted that all things will be revealed about WHY .... Because that's the question I seek when learning any doctrine...not just the what and the how...but the why...that's how knowledge of the gospel becomes a part of you. But we don't have all the why's and that's where faith is necessary...if we knew ALL things, this whole earthly experience would be pointless. And some "why's" are harder than others, but believe me, my list of "why's" and truths WAY outnumbers my list of things not confirmed to me. How can I deny those things? It would be like a member of ISIS putting my head on a block and trying to force me to deny Christ. I can't do it.

I ponder often what I expect to accomplish on this forum...I don't know for sure. One thing I believe I am accomplishing is looking at aspects of what I know and take for granted and confirming the "WHY'S" It's been an eye opener and has been good for me. But please know I do fully appreciate what you think about Joseph Smith....I truly do.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Would it matter to you?

.

well, its like this -


knowing what type of person Smith was...

knowing about his teachings of sex with other women...

Knowing his teachings on God being a man that evolved to be a god..>Im forced to say that

"If it ever turned out that Smith was right?...I would reject that god!"



Simply put, "That god is not worth worshiping."


I want no part of that god
I want no part of Smith...

I do not want to share in an afterlife where Smith has gotten away with it.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Would it matter to you?

.

Im not sure I have answered yes or no to your question....
But Im sure you can tell how I feel about the teachings of Smith and of him as a person....


The Smith ideas about sex with other women besides your own wife...the secret handshakes...the secret names, the secret underwear...


I totally reject that junk and reject it even ifit turned out to be true.
Such things are not worth my time, i totally reject the god that would think they have merit.

I also would reject a Jesus that turned out to be Satan's brother...

[alanmolstad]

so......any questions about that?

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

so......any questions about that?

Not at all...you have made yourself perfectly clear.

[Christian]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

I didn't say you don't respond...I said you don't usually respond to my scripture, I wasn't trying to be rude. And I was trying to be funny about your responses when I said I was used to them...just stating that I understand your intensity...I don't think I conveyed that very well. I was sincerely trying to open a dialogue and show respect for your testimony and beliefs. I know there's a nice guy in there, what do I need to do to bring him out? I'm not trying to fight and bicker, I'm really not. And I'm not being facetious or condescending either (discussing through written word loses all inflection) I'm discussing my take on doctrine and scripture and inquiring about yours, that's all.

I agree fully and hope we can continue in this vein.

I do try to respond to your every scripture reference, but when they don't say what you are trying to prove. . .I don't accept them as legitimate 'proof texts.' Much of your theological beliefs seem to come from eisegesis (to put into) rather than exegesis (to pull out of) doctrines in relation to the texts you choose. In other words (like joe smith did), a p***age mentions 3 'glories,' one of the sun, another of the moon, and another of the stars, you try to make the word "glories" (which legitimately means 'beauty' or 'splendor') into a whole made-up doctrine about 3 places where people supposedly go when they die, which the BIBLE VERSES DO NOT SUPPORT AT ALL. Using your eisegesis method you could take a p***age about a shepherd tending a flock of sheep, and make up a whole doctrine about everyone being required to wear wool underwear wherever they go to ward off evil spirits. . .the BIBLE JUST DOES NOT SUPPORT THAT, just like your three 'glories' as places for folks to go when they die is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE BIBLE AT ALL. Joey just made it up.

I hope you realize the difference between how your religion invents its doctrines and how CHRISTIANITY gets ours. We take what the Bible SAYS and determine what IT MEANS. We don't just use a few 'proof-texts' to 'justify' something we have made up as smith and company do.

Would you like to discuss any of your 'mormon-specific' doctrines in light of that?

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by Christian

I agree fully and hope we can continue in this vein.

I do try to respond to your every scripture reference, but when they don't say what you are trying to prove. . .I don't accept them as legitimate 'proof texts.' Much of your theological beliefs seem to come from eisegesis (to put into) rather than exegesis (to pull out of) doctrines in relation to the texts you choose. In other words (like joe smith did), a p***age mentions 3 'glories,' one of the sun, another of the moon, and another of the stars, you try to make the word "glories" (which legitimately means 'beauty' or 'splendor') into a whole made-up doctrine about 3 places where people supposedly go when they die, which the BIBLE VERSES DO NOT SUPPORT AT ALL. Using your eisegesis method you could take a p***age about a shepherd tending a flock of sheep, and make up a whole doctrine about everyone being required to wear wool underwear wherever they go to ward off evil spirits. . .the BIBLE JUST DOES NOT SUPPORT THAT, just like your three 'glories' as places for folks to go when they die is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE BIBLE AT ALL. Joey just made it up.

I hope you realize the difference between how your religion invents its doctrines and how CHRISTIANITY gets ours. We take what the Bible SAYS and determine what IT MEANS. We don't just use a few 'proof-texts' to 'justify' something we have made up as smith and company do.

Would you like to discuss any of your 'mormon-specific' doctrines in light of that?

Well, some of the eisegesis would be by revelation, but I do fully understand you don't believe that for a minute,(commonly referred to as "invention", "made up" etc etc lol) sorry, me trying to be funny again.....not so much right? So, we will focus on the biblical portions. Thank you for responding...it's getting late and I'm still unpacking from our harried trip home yesterday. I will get back in touch with you tomorrow, okay?

Thanks again Christian

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

The God of the Catholic and Protestant believer is real...its the true God of the Bible.

Weird. They keep telling me they're different; now you're telling me they're the same.

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by Erundur

Weird. They keep telling me they're different; now you're telling me they're the same.

Yeah, Chris and Alan don't agree on this, there are a few things they see differently, which is fine, you just need to pay attention to who you're addressing.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Not at all...you have made yourself perfectly clear.

While I never write and demand people believe my words I do attempt to make my own words easy to read.

I try to make even the way my words appear on the computer screen easy to read and follow along with.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

information on who Joseph Smith was married to alter any of that. .......

This is like what the Mormon church seems also to be getting their followers ready to face....Getting ready to deal with the next shoe to drop
The shoe that Joe Smith did in-fact sleep around with underage girls, and that this should not matter to Mormon people still putting their trust in his motives.


This means that regardless of what shoe falls next when dealing with the sexual exploitation of children that Smith will be shown guilty of, it does not matter.

The true follower of the Mormon teachings is being some how "insulated" from facing the fact that the guy was a pedophile, a child molester, who abused his position within a religion that he came up with for self-promotion....




So, at that point what else could a Christin say to a Mormon in an effort to reach them?

Once a Mormon states that it really does not matter to them about Smith's sexual history with children, what point is there in thinking any other argument I might bring up would matter to them?...............

[Christian]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

Well, some of the eisegesis would be by revelation, but I do fully understand you don't believe that for a minute,(commonly referred to as "invention", "made up" etc etc lol) sorry, me trying to be funny again.....not so much right? So, we will focus on the biblical portions. Thank you for responding...it's getting late and I'm still unpacking from our harried trip home yesterday. I will get back in touch with you tomorrow, okay?

Thanks again Christian

Perhaps discussing joseph smith's 'revelations' and your 'modern-day' revelations would be a good place for us to begin. I have to 'go up north' today, so won't be home until later. I'll travel about 250 miles today for business.

I may get home late afternoon at which time I may post something.

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by Christian

Perhaps discussing joseph smith's 'revelations' and your 'modern-day' revelations would be a good place for us to begin. I have to 'go up north' today, so won't be home until later. I'll travel about 250 miles today for business.

I may get home late afternoon at which time I may post something.

Ok...looks like I've got a super busy work week at the flower shop so I'll get back with you. I would actually like to further discuss biblical interpretation if that's ok. I'm quite aware of your take on revelation. That will be a short discussion lol. Thanks Christian