Mormonism not Christian...

[_Yoda]

Thews, you and I will never agree because you view things as very black and white. It is either all or nothing with you, and that is just not the way I see things. I don't see how that makes me a liar. I am, and have always been truthful about what I believe. Do I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet? Yes, however, he made some HUGE ERRORS and sinned, much like the prophet, David did. (of David and Bathsheba). I believe that Fanny Alger was Joseph's Bathsheba. And after Fanny, his judgment was never the same.

Ok, your witness to the world is that you believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God, and his truth claims. Let me remind you of your post where you failed to answer the question regarding your conclusions:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22681

I feel like I am finally at a place where I am at peace with how I feel in regards to the Church.

I have been able to establish a way to still be an active member, and participate on my terms. That is, in a large part, due to the support I have received here.

My path is not for everyone, and I completely respect those who decide to go a different direction. Everyone has to do what is best for themselves and for their family.

I am comfortable with my choice, and with the opportunity I have to voice my concerns here.

Do you mind answering what "conclusions" you came to? I asked before, but you decided not to answer.

Does that mean that there aren't some concepts of Christ that are similar between how Mormons and Christians view Christ? I don't think so. Thews, don't you believe that Christ came to earth? So do I. Do you believe He died for our sins? So do I. Do you believe in the beauty of his Sermon on the Mount? So do I.

I believe Jesus Christ was God, and Joseph Smith was a charlatan and nothing more. Magic rocks (seer stones) placed in a stove-pipe hat used to see evil treasure guardians is where you find the source of Mormon doctrine for your prophet of God. You believe in Joseph Smith's doctrine, so you also must believe in D&C 132:

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

In summation Liz, thanks for your witness professing belief in the truth claims of Joseph Smith. I stand corrected and apologize for insinuating you believed Joseph Smith was a false prophet of God, when you accept Joseph Smith as your prophet of God and accept Mormon doctrine as true. As you worship in the church of Mormon doctrine and hold its beliefs near and dear to your heart, I applaud you for accepting D&C132 as the word of God and all it encompasses. I should never have doubted your witness:

http://www.apostolic.edu/biblestudy/files/9th-com.htm

THE 9th COMMANDMENT
Exodus 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

You are not choosing to read what I say, and you are putting words in my mouth. I have stated many times that I have do not accept D&C 132, and that Fanny tempted Joseph the way Bathsheba tempted David. Do you consider David a prophet? I look at Joseph the same way as I look at David. He was a faithful prophet of God BEFORE he fell to the temptation of Fanny.

[_thews]

You are not choosing to read what I say, and you are putting words in my mouth. I have stated many times that I have do not accept D&C 132, and that Fanny tempted Joseph the way Bathsheba tempted David.

You can quit the diversion here, as what you have said is that you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and the doctrine of Joseph Smith is the true word of God. Attempting to exonerate Joseph Smith by painting a 16 year old girl as the temptress pretty much solidifies your position... it was Fanny's fault. Was Sarah Ann Whitney yet another sleazy slime for tempting poor Joseph Smith? Just how far do you have to reach to attempt to paint the facade that your arguments make sense? You said in your own words you accept the words of Joseph Smith as those from a prophet of God... that is what you said. You reject some of Joseph Smith's doctrine as false, yet still profess to believe in Mormon doctrine... that is your witness.

Do you consider David a prophet?

Do you ever answer questions asked of you, or do you rely on common diversionary tactics to sway the conversation into something you believe you can argue that bolsters your position? I asked you what conclusions you posted that you came to regarding Mormonism, and again you have failed to answer... why? We all know you believe Joseph Smith to be a prophet of God... that is YOUR witness. What conclusions did you come to?

I look at Joseph the same way as I look at David. He was a faithful prophet of God BEFORE he fell to the temptation of Fanny.

And again you throw a 16 year old girl seduced by a false prophet as the villain. It's no wonder the LDS apologists throw Jesus Christ under the bus to defend their false prophet. Seriously Liz... do you really have to go there? Isn't what you're claiming completely unfounded by defaming the memory of Fanny Alger? Do you feel justified in dragging her through the mud to defend your prophet of God?

[_Yoda]

You are not choosing to read what I say, and you are putting words in my mouth. I have stated many times that I have do not accept D&C 132, and that Fanny tempted Joseph the way Bathsheba tempted David.

You can quit the diversion here, as what you have said is that you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and the doctrine of Joseph Smith is the true word of God. Attempting to exonerate Joseph Smith by painting a 16 year old girl as the temptress pretty much solidifies your position... it was Fanny's fault. Was Sarah Ann Whitney yet another sleazy slime for tempting poor Joseph Smith? Just how far do you have to reach to attempt to paint the facade that your arguments make sense? You said in your own words you accept the words of Joseph Smith as those from a prophet of God... that is what you said. You reject some of Joseph Smith's doctrine as false, yet still profess to believe in Mormon doctrine... that is your witness.

Do you consider David a prophet?

Do you ever answer questions asked of you, or do you rely on common diversionary tactics to sway the conversation into something you believe you can argue that bolsters your position? I asked you what conclusions you posted that you came to regarding Mormonism, and again you have failed to answer... why? We all know you believe Joseph Smith to be a prophet of God... that is YOUR witness. What conclusions did you come to?

I look at Joseph the same way as I look at David. He was a faithful prophet of God BEFORE he fell to the temptation of Fanny.

And again you throw a 16 year old girl seduced by a false prophet as the villain. It's no wonder the LDS apologists throw Jesus Christ under the bus to defend their false prophet. Seriously Liz... do you really have to go there? Isn't what you're claiming completely unfounded by defaming the memory of Fanny Alger? Do you feel justified in dragging her through the mud to defend your prophet of God?

What the hell are you talking about? I do not, and have never blamed Fanny. Joseph fell. He lusted after Fanny. i never said it was Fanny's fault. Once again, you are putting words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate it. You keep saying that I have to accept Joseph's prophecies as all or nothing. I am claiming that I don't.

I do not wish to discuss this with you anymore, Thews, because you are refusing to actually read what I am saying and you continue to twist my words. Everyone here can see that.

Quit twisting my words, and pick a new target.

[_thews]

What the hell are you talking about? I do not, and have never blamed Fanny.

Oh really? What did you mean when you said this:

I have stated many times that I have do not accept D&C 132, and that Fanny tempted Joseph the way Bathsheba tempted David.

So Fanny "tempted Joseph" but you're not blaming Fanny? Was the flaming sword just too much for poor Joseph Smith to pass by?

Joseph fell. He lusted after Fanny. i never said it was Fanny's fault.

See above... that's exactly what you said when you claimed Fanny "tempted" Joseph.

Once again, you are putting words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate it.

And once again, you are attempting to skew the words that come out of your mouth to imply you didn't say them, when you know you did. Still no answer to the "conclusions" you came to. Why? You posted it, and still you don't have the guts to state what that conclusion was. Why is that? Family pressure too much? Is that why you continue to paint Mormonism as Christian? Do you enjoy being a teacher to itching ears?

You keep saying that I have to accept Joseph's prophecies as all or nothing. I am claiming that I don't.

You have said you're striving to attain your doctorate, which implies you are intelligent. If you are in fact intelligent, then if you claim to place faith in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God and the doctrine of Joseph Smith as the word of God, then an intelligent person would assume you would accept all of the doctrine of Joseph Smith. Which other doctrines of Joseph Smith do you openly reject as false? Oh wait, you can't even reply to the conclusions you posted you came to, so assuming you'd be honest enough to answer this question is a bit of a reach isn't it?

I do not wish to discuss this with you anymore, Thews, because you are refusing to actually read what I am saying and you continue to twist my words. Everyone here can see that.

I disagree Liz, as anyone with an ounce of intelligence would know that you are a false witness from the word go. You divert and twist your words to force the square peg into the round hole that Mormonism is in fact Christianity, when you don't believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. If you did, then you would accept your role as a part of your husband's band of wives... just as Joseph Smith taught. One more time Liz, since your soul knows compromise, just exactly what did you conclude when you posted you had come to some sort of conclusion? Cat got your tongue?

Quit twisting my words, and pick a new target.

You're a liar. Where are your hens to back you up? Jersey Girl? You don't believe Joseph Smith was anything but a charlatan do you? Why not try intellectual honesty at some point? You can, if you choose, explain the conclusion you came to? Please enlighten me so that I may understand the error on my ways. I present no false witness... can you say the same?

[_Nightlion]

said nothin'

Against my substantive post that made remarkable points of hitherto unthunked depths you can only attack me personally.

I mean, hey, make an argument that the Jews never did receive the new heart from God. Tell us that circumcision was not a sign in their flesh to remind them to circumcise their hearts unto God that they might be filled with his love.

Tell us that these points fail Christianity.

Tell us that Christ did not command us to do the will of the Father on earth as it is done in heaven. Tell us that the disciples of Jesus did not ask him how they can work the works of God......

John 6:28-29
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Tell us that Christians today know how to get that will and how to accomplish it with power. hmmm? Tell us that there are real Christians established somewhere today. Anywhere?

"Reach out and touch your television screen and accept Jesus as Lord and say halleluia, send us your offering to this address you see right now. Praise God you are saved from hell fire. Add just a little bit extra to your praise offering, thank you Jesus, I can feel the love, can't you feel it?"

I am one who knows. Obviously. Refute it.

[_Tobin]

I see thews has opened multiple fronts on gdemetz, liz and nightlion. If I dogpile on, I wonder if we can get thews to accept the gospel and set a baptism date by next Sunday?

[_Nightlion]

You are not choosing to read what I say, and you are putting words in my mouth. I have stated many times that I have do not accept D&C 132, and that Fanny tempted Joseph the way Bathsheba tempted David. Do you consider David a prophet? I look at Joseph the same way as I look at David. He was a faithful prophet of God BEFORE he fell to the temptation of Fanny.

Liz, just because an evil cabal of gay historians have agreed to accept something as a fact and run with it will never make it a fact.

Joseph was truly born of God. He was prophet enough that IF he had fallen in the eyes of God he would have said so. Just as David did.

Joseph said in one of his last sermons that he would show that he is not a fallen prophet. And later said that he had a conscience void of offense towards man and God.

You quaver and sell him out because the fearful and unbelieving refuse to suffer him any respect?
Putz

[_Yoda]

I am not fond of Thews, and I am not going to engage him in a battle. There are a couple of points that he made where he twisted my words around which I will address. I would mainly like to address what Nightlion stated about how he felt I "sold Joseph Smith out" by labeling him a false prophet.

As far as I am concerned, his actions sold us, the members of the Church out. One thing that Thews pointed out which I will clarify is that he quoted me as saying that Joseph was tempted by Fanny, and succumbed to that temptaion. In this, I misspoke somewhat. I did not mean to indicate, as Thews suggested, that Fanny was in any way, at fault for Joseph's demise. Joseph succumbed to his lust for Fanny, and that is why he fell. Now, maybe he was legitimately in love with Fanny. If that was the case, then he should have divorced Emma and started a life with Fanny. I don't believe that really was the case, however. Based on both Joseph and Emma's writings, I think that it is clear, that in spite of all of their problems, they truly did love each other.

I think that Joseph sought for a way to "have it all". He may have honestly thought that he received a revevlation from the Lord; I don't know. But it is clear to me that polygamy was not something that the Lord meant to have re-established. Polygamy was an Old Testament cultural norm...period. It has no place in the modern church. Since Joseph and Brigham massively screwed up (pun intended), and established it, there were, unfortunately, saints who in good faith practiced it, thinking that they were doing right by the Lord. Those saints will not be punished in any way, and I believe that the Lord will allow them to stay together as families in the next life, if they so choose. However, I do not believe that polygamy is the Lord's ideal form of marriage.

As far as my conclusions which I have found peace with, that Thews seems to think I have avoided expressing, they are as follows:

I believe that the Book of Mormon was an inspired work, and is a further testament to the living Christ. Whether this book is a literal history, or simply inspired writing, I really don't know, nor do I think it really matters in the grand scheme of things. There are portions of the Bible which I wonder about, as far as a literalness of translation is concerned as well. There are so many things which have been left open to interpretation, I think that it is best for us all to simply try to live life the best way we can. Love our families and our friends. Say our prayers. Worship Christ and hope for the best.

If that makes me a hypocrite, oh well. At least I will die a peaceful hypocrite, if that is, indeed, what I am, and my family and friends will know that I truly loved them and wanted the best for them.

[_ludwigm]

Christians, not just Catholics, view Satan as a fallen angel. The difference is in how we view what angels are.

My view (atheist, born as catholic...) is:


Lucifer (the rightmost on the picture, my ideal character) has wings.

[_madeleine]

Christians, not just Catholics, view Satan as a fallen angel. The difference is in how we view what angels are.

My view (atheist, born as catholic...) is:


Lucifer (the rightmost on the picture, my ideal character) has wings.

Mormons would like that work of art, once the wings were edited out. I wonder, does that fall under "removing plain and precious things"?