| Author | Message | ||
     solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 527 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
The subject line pretty much says it. Every time a new Protestant cultist arrives here to rant about how Mormonism is "un-Christian" I ask for proof that their version of Christian belief is the correct one. So far, not one of you has provided the slightest proof. You can't even prove that Jesus ever lived. You can't show me a SINGLE contemporary record from the Romans which reports his existence. You claim that the Bible is accurate, inerrant, complete and properly translated, but can't show any original New Testament manuscript -- even the fragments which exist only date back to AD 125 at the earliest. If you are going to condemn my beliefs because they don't match your beliefs, first you must prove out your beliefs, and NONE of you has done so. Why would God not provide that proof? Most of the world's population isn't any kind of Christian or Jew, when proof would be so easy to provide that the LACK of that proof leads many to believe that there is no God at all, or to follow the "God is dead" idea. All of your arguments (and mine, for that matter) are essentially "You're wrong because I'm right," when they actually mean "I think you're wrong because I think I'm right." Mormon doctrine answers the questions of how the Bible might be imperfect and why we don't have incontrovertible proof that Christianity is true. So here is your chance, PROVE that what you believe is true, or admit (by your failure or by your silence) that you can't prove it, you only THINK it. | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 30 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
Thats quite a demand from someone not willing to do the same, don't ya think? Whats important here is this, while proving any form of religion as "true" is impossible it is possible to prove certain ones as incorrect, one example, mormonism. Since that has been done many many times by numerous different people using LDS text there is no need to go any further STUDY YOURSELF THE TRUTH IS EVIDENT!! Sp, you belong to The Church of Joseph Smith of Latter Day satanists I know of satans plot it will not work now or ever. Mormonism was and is satans final attempt to reap souls. You see Sp, when Christ died on the cross for all who would simply believe and follow Christ Jesus, it kinda pissed satan off for making salvation so easy. So what does he do?? Since not even he can deniy Christ he creates his own church under the blasphmious guise of the sacred name of Jesus Christ in which people must earn and work towards salvation. Question: If you offered your child a gift out of pure love and kindness, and he/she said I can't accept it right now but let me go mow the lawn, do the dishes, clean my room, and wash your car and then I will accpet your gift because I have earned it on my own. Your gift is no longer a gift it is a transaction. Well my lost friend, the gift being offered by Christ is something only he can earn create and give, NO man, woman, or child that has ever walked this green earth except Christ Jesus will ever come close to being able to attain his own salvation and no matter how far one might get ALL FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY. While the mormons are busy "earning" salvation satan laughs, he finds it even more funny that you turn your back on the obvious lies he has created in mormonism. From your post I can clearly read that you are claiming the bible is false, no? So why do you carry one around and claim to be christians when you most certainly DO NOT fall under any defination of the word? Well I know why, its part of satans plan for you, its quite a comical scheme to him but to us christians as you mockingly call us, its not that funny to watch people happily walk down the road to hell, especially when salvation is so easy to accept. Mormonism is false rebuke your godhood theory and accept Jesus Christ! Or, cast the bible aside and place full trust in your lds leaders, else be condemed while the truth was carried in your own hands. When the mormons pick a either the bom or the bible and rebuke the other is when we will remain silent. Silence, me, maybe? The truth NEVER!! | ||
| godchild (godchild) Junior Member Username: godchild Post Number: 34 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.118 |
Thank God for the Holy Spirit to guide us and speak to our hearts. Thank you, Lord, for the faithfulness you have given us that renews our faith in you every minute, every hour, every day. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 300 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.252.64.33 |
x11: I take it the last note was referring to our hope of getting any thruth about our Church through you. Though we are at an innteresting junction - LDS state what we know to be Satans plan - and you claim we are that plan. I had a very interesting conversation with a Moslem whilst serving my mission (in Middlesborough at the time) as he ran me through his religions version of the battle we call Armegeddon, I saw that he and I were looking from totally opposite aspects - I recognised his evil force as being Christ, from the way we would see it. So, I am wondering to myself, if I see such things from an opposite point of view from him, and you say (I assume due to your claims) we are working for opposite sides, I must align you with him, and therefore suggest your ideas of who is working (knowingly or not) to progress Satan's will must clearly show you are being grossly mislead. now, the junction is this. I do not really believe that using such "logic" would really prove you are a Satanist - yet you very childishly believe you can prove I am one using such logic. In reality you believe what your preacher has told you, and are thus blinded from the truth. Calling us satanists is confirming your ignorance of both what LDS believe, and your willingness to be led by those that are uninspired. I can Believe in both the Bible and the Book of Mormon as the words of God, I know that galls you, but that is because you need to learn the truth, not just follow the leader. Your condemnationis weak and pointless as it has no authority behind it - we know that we have the power of the Priesthood to rebuke in God's name. So what authority, from God does your preacher have? | ||
| steelsword (steelsword) New member Username: steelsword Post Number: 10 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.192.2.34 |
Who's following a leader? Our minister has the same authority as i do. Christ said all believers in him would become a ROYAL PREISTHOOD. As you can see this is MALE or FEMALE. We do not use a preisthood from the old testament that Christ defeated on Cross, We use a Royal PREISTHOOD that Christ gave to all beleivers. For their is only One HIGH Preist, Higher than Aaron or Melchesdic preisthoods would ever be , Jesus Christ , & HIM ALONE. | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 32 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
joesdad: How can a house divided against itself stand? | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 33 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
jd, If you had Christ in your life you would have no need to rebuke anything as he fights and removes those battles for his people. | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 34 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
jd Define the god you worship | ||
| egk (egk) Intermediate Member Username: egk Post Number: 130 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.23.219.83 |
Solopilot, Mormon doctrine answers the questions of how the Bible might be imperfect and why we don't have incontrovertible proof that Christianity is true. What are the Mormon answer for this? (I'm more interested in the latter than the former.) EGK | ||
| egk (egk) Intermediate Member Username: egk Post Number: 131 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.23.219.83 |
Solopilot and Joesdad, According to my understanding of Joesdad, Mormonism teaches that there is only one God, the Father, but that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are part of the Godhead. What exactly are Jesus and the Holy Spirit if they are part of the Godhead? Can the rest of us "achieve" the same status? EGK | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 124 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot; "You can't even prove that Jesus ever lived. You can't show me a SINGLE contemporary record from the Romans which reports his existence. You claim that the Bible is accurate, inerrant, complete and properly translated, but can't show any original New Testament manuscript -- even the fragments which exist only date back to AD 125 at the earliest. " Your upto the old mormon trick of rubbishing the bible, something they say they never do Why do we need to prove it when your LDS site states this; "“The Holy Bible testifies of Jesus Christ and has influenced and sustained millions of His followers. It is a collection of sacred writings containing God’s revelations and accounts of His dealings with His children in the Holy Land. The historical accounts in the Bible cover many centuries, from the time of Adam through the death of the Apostles.” Rubbish the bible as much as you like Solopilot but please in doing so request your lds remove reference of it. Tell them to hand out such statements as what you say about the HOLY BIBLE when they doorknock and then try telling the world THE LDS IS A CHRISTIAN CHURCH You are anti bible and anti christ I suppose the next question will be. What version of the bible do you prefer and why. I am at a loss as to why you even have a bible Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 303 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.252.64.33 |
egk: Yes only one God - i.e. our Father, the creator of all, yet Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, individuals seperate from the aforementioned God, are also gods. God the Father, condesended to have or allow the others achieve the status of a god to enable them to take part in the process of creating the worlds etc., under the supreme direction of the Father. Therefore, we will never be able to take the place of, or work in the shoes of any of them - though it is their, and our goal that we do become as them. In my job I often have clients who find it necessary that they give the authority to undertake actions in their name to others (power of attorney) - through their (the clients) expression of will, the others can do stuff (usually specified in the document giving the power) as if they were that person. That is a very simplified, example of how the Godhead works. X11: you do not say what house you refer to, or indeed how it is "divided against itself" I note what you say in respect of the need to rebuke, however this fails to take into account our Saviours need to do just that. I appreciate what you say regaridng having Christ in our lives, but it is naive to think he will fight all your battles for you. I worship God. Maybe if you defined YOUR God, I could see how to define Him in terms you can relate to (I might then be able to correct any misinformation you have been given, or obtained about my beliefs). Nulla: You can't get past your incorrect impression of how we view the Bible, despite my having told you. What SP refers to is YOUR incorrect, and simplistic view of the Bible, where it came from, and to what it actually represents - you vainly think that your view is flawless, and therefore think it is an attack on the Bible - if any attack was meant, I am sure it is upon your willingness to believe in an account after the act (i.e. a bunch of blokes at Nicene) rather than the facts. Eee, Nulla, isn't there a Thread already asking that question - opened by SP himself?  | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 66 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.170 |
joesddad has just said again he believes Jesus is (only) a god. Since mormon men can become (a) god, to them Jesus was just the first of many gods that God condescended to let be the first of many gods. But that can't be true because they also believe satan was also Jesus's brother who fell. What he is saying is "the mormons worship one of many gods". Otherwise, the title of their church would be "Church of God of Latter Day Saints". They have made it proper by doing this to change the name to "Church of Joseph Smith of Latter Day Saints" or "Church of Joesdad of Latter Day Saints". If I have misinterpreted what joesadad said, would someone besides him explain what, exactly, he just said. He has just said mormons do not worship God, but one of many gods. Let me add here that though it may not be well known by mormons, they also believe that satan can be forgiven. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 67 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.170 |
I know the mormon church has a book to instruct the members in how to speak or answer the 'gentiles'. I would highly recommend that joedad get a copy and study it before he causes more confusion, not only to people who read his comments but especially for his own ability to share just what he, or his church does believe. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 68 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.170 |
joesddad has just said again he believes Jesus is (only) a god. Since mormon men can become (a) god, to them Jesus was just the first of many gods that God condescended to let be the first of many gods. But that can't be true because they also believe satan was also Jesus's brother who fell. What he is saying is "the mormons worship one of many gods". Otherwise, the title of their church would be "Church of God of Latter Day Saints". They have made it proper by doing this to change the name to "Church of Joseph Smith of Latter Day Saints" or "Church of Joesdad of Latter Day Saints". If I have misinterpreted what joesadad said, would someone besides him explain what, exactly, he just said. He has just said mormons do not worship God, but one of many gods. Let me add here that though it may not be well known by mormons, they also believe that satan can be forgiven. | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 38 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
Joesdad is also claiming that his god opperates heaven like a business! LMAO!! jd, so whats the symbol on the stock exchange? Will mormons get in trouble for insider trading? Do you think I could get into heaven on a typo? You are a funny guy joesdad! Okay I'll stop this aint funny, you really do believe this stuff!? I'm sorry I just cant help it, but it will be you who's laughing in heaven when your some big shot heavenly executive, and I'm stuck in heavens mail room. GOD IS NOT BOUND BY ANY HUMAN LAW! HE IS THE LAW | ||
| egk (egk) Intermediate Member Username: egk Post Number: 133 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.74.36.163 |
Joesdad, Are Jesus and the Holy Spirit to be worshipped in the same way as the Father? EGK | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 125 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad.... Solopilot wrote: You claim that the Bible is accurate, inerrant, complete and properly translated, but can't show any original New Testament manuscript -- even the fragments which exist only date back to AD 125 at the earliest. If you are going to condemn my beliefs because they don't match your beliefs, first you must prove out your beliefs, and NONE of you has done so. You say I do not understand your view of the bible but insist you understand mine. It is your belief that is telling us the bible is incorrect and incomplete Prove the bible is incomplete. nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 304 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
egk: No, Christ made His relationship with the Father clear "no man cometh unto the Father but by me" - we do not worship them as we do God. X11: I think you are being a little too silly aren't you? - thanks for the substantial points in your comments Null: I gave you a list of missing books from the Bible on another thread, and then later asked you to comment on that list, something you have failed to do - prove the Bible is not incomplete. Your beliefs would only ever be condemned if they were wrong - so take up SP's challenge why don't you? GC: What a foolish claim - you know there is no such book, so give up on it - your wild claims are becoming desperate. I find your atempt at logic al the more rediculous as you claim to have been a member of the Church, and claim to know what we believe - another in your long list of lies I'm afraid. You pretend to those others posting here that your know what you talk about claiming Knowledge form experience in the Church - but still lie about things when you know you are not stating what we believe - what a fraud. I see that anything contining truth goes right over your head, no wonder you continue to fail to understand basic LDS doctrine. | ||
| x11 (x11) Junior Member Username: x11 Post Number: 39 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 208.186.103.20 |
jd, Silly well yes, But I just cant figure out who is more silly though me or you? My silliness is sarcastic your being serious. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 79 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.7 |
Can any man understand the 'basic lds doctrine'? I certainly don't see that here. There is no 'basic lds doctrine' and can never be because your leaders continue to change it. Each ward or stake is given books to teach by. They are allowed to add their own interpretations when teaching. No mormon can deny this. If anyone does deny it, then there would be no necessity of having a 'higher' office, would there? This is how the leaders in the lds deceive. They have always used the excuse that 'it was someone else, not me'. That also protects them by apologists that claim, "you misunderstood what the prophet was saying. He could have just been speaking his personal thoughts." I would like to see any paper with a statement by any mormon prophet, apologist, or historian saying, "Now these are just my personal thoughts". No, they say, "When the prophet has spoken, it is from God". So yes, I heard a ward leader state that Satan could be forgiven. You need to remember, I was a member until 1986, and you became a member only a few years before this. I was 13 when I joined in 1960. The mormon teachings have undergone so many changes since then, it is difficult to keep track. Would you not agree? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 80 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.7 |
Joesdad, have you or solopilot reached the office of 'bishop yet'. My stepfather was one and I had conversations with him almost daily for many years. Do not tell me you know more than he did? He had no reason to lie to me. Anymore than my Mother did/does. They also went on a mission years after I left the church, so it isn't as though they stopped believing what they learned from the lds. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 81 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.7 |
You admitted you were excommunicated. For how long? And when you went back did you go back to the same 'rank' or start over? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 82 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.7 |
Tell us just how many mormon books you HAVE read. You don't seem to know much, but deny everything you think 'can't possible have been spoken my mormon leaders'? Why is that? Anyone can sit around and say 'nay, nay'. (I almost added 'like a jackass', but decided to be kind. After all, a jackass doesn't know he is a jackass. Usually not even human ones.  ) | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 83 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.7 |
You have never given a reasonable explanation as to who was the first God, in your opinion, (which I assume is the mormon one). | ||
| steelsword (steelsword) New member Username: steelsword Post Number: 25 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.192.2.34 |
Just because Books are mentioned in the bible that are not there, doesn't mean they were Gospel or intended for the bible. I mean the "book of jasher" could as well been the book of US history, it which i grant history is important,but weather or not it was prophetic or gospel we do not know.If you want to say they are missing books that is your perogative,but were these books scripture ? ask your prophet & see if his direct line can answer this & translate it for us. | ||
| steelsword (steelsword) Junior Member Username: steelsword Post Number: 26 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.192.2.34 |
Jesus is God! AND LOVE TO ALL, my dear friends here at factnet . http://everystudent.com/wires/whodoyousay.html | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 535 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
x11: Not at all. You condemn my beliefs because they don't match yours. Thus, it is your responsibility to prove that yours are correct, which you have not even attempted to do, then or now. egk: As I've mentioned before, our doctrine is that we came to Earth life in order to gain experience, to live by (or without) faith. If the Scriptures were perfect and complete, if we had PROOF of what we believe, we could not live by faith. We would not learn for ourselves. Nulla: No, not "rubbishing" the Bible -- recognising that it is not perfect. I love the way you ask Joe to prove that the Bible is incomplete. What proof do you have that it is COMPLETE? You base your faith on the idea that a group of Catholic scholars could tell what was and was not scriptural -- yet you reject the idea that the church to which they belonged is true! Steel: 1 Corinthians refers to an earlier epistle not in the Bible. What makes that first letter any less scriptural than the two which were included? NONE of what we call the books of the Bible was "intended for the Bible." They were individual books and letters, only collated centuries after the last was written. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 128 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot, No, not "rubbishing" the Bible -- recognising that it is not perfect. I love the way you ask Joe to prove that the Bible is incomplete. What proof do you have that it is COMPLETE You continue to rubbish the bible in an effort to make the BoM seem at all possible. You mormons claim the bible is incomplete. Prove your claims. We christians are not running around stating "the bible is complete" Why do we have to prove something we are not trying to make a claim of. You make the claims you prove them. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 129 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
While we are in a "still waiting" thread. I have an un answered question. Is the book of Abraham and its contents as translated by js the true and correct translation of Egyptian hieroglyphics as depicted on the papyrus ? | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 540 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
Nulla: Stop dodging. If you have proof that your beliefs are the standard by which others should be judged, please provide it for all to see. If you don't reply with such proof, then we will know that all you have is opinion, not fact. Back it up or back down. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Member Username: godchild Post Number: 94 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.101 |
nulla, I believe solopilot could go to every sight on christianity and read every book about the Bible, including the Bible, he would still not be able to accept the truth. This a good parallel comparison of the first four books of the New Testament (plus book of Thomas):www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/meta-5g.html.(for anyone who hasn't seen it). | ||
| cjv (cjv) Member Username: cjv Post Number: 65 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 67.177.85.203 |
It's backward logic nulla. The LDS come along in the late 1800's and challenge Christianity (2000 years old) and them demand WE prove our Christian beliefs. It's nutty. It's utter nonsense. In Christ alone I place my trust... | ||
| egk (egk) Intermediate Member Username: egk Post Number: 142 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.23.216.129 |
Solopilot, egk: As I've mentioned before, our doctrine is that we came to Earth life in order to gain experience, to live by (or without) faith. If the Scriptures were perfect and complete, if we had PROOF of what we believe, we could not live by faith. We would not learn for ourselves. Then why do we need a prophet? EGK | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 131 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. what claims solopilot... post my claims? It is your church and your beliefs that question the bible and say it is incomplete. Show me where I have stated the bible is complete. I can show you where you and Joesdad have both stated it isnt' prove your claims (Message edited by nulla on May 18, 2005) | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 134 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Is the book of Abraham and its contents as translated by js the true and correct translation of Egyptian hieroglyphics as depicted on the papyrus ? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 117 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.199 |
It occurred to me this morning: if solopilot really wants an answer about the creation timespan, he should "go to the source". Go to the Lord in prayer, and if it is God's will, and he has a sincere heart, the Lord will answer. | ||
| steelsword (steelsword) Junior Member Username: steelsword Post Number: 45 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.69.138.140 |
Just some thoughts from diffrent points of view. http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/longdays.html http://home.att.net/~jamspsu84/ttocday.html | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 135 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Thanks Steelsworld, I like the first link very much, good reading, though something some mormons would be quick to discard. What I first find catching on that site is the opening. "The age of the earth and the universe is no longer disputed among most scientists. Science tells us the earth is ~4.5 x 109 years old. The universe is ~12-16 x 109 years old. " Wam bam thank you mam, straight to the point and no hiding the fact about science. The bible still holds up as gods word. Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 308 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.252.64.33 |
Nulla: before you are tempted to take a question from SP as a statement of what the Church believes (I am certain this is not what SP means you to do) and run off with some false ideas about those crazy Mormons have a read through some of the items on this site http://eyring.hplx.net/Eyring/faq/evolution/ for some info. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 139 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.241 |
So then are we to assume nothing you and sp say can be thought to be what you have learned from the mormon church. And how are you so 'certain' this is not what sp means nulla to do? Are you now speaking for yourself, or sp, or the church? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 140 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.241 |
The second to last paragraph by sp says 'mormon doctrine' not 'my opinion'. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 137 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad. If the statements that Solopilot make contradict the official views of your church then it might be best if you ask him. If you read what I said in the other threads you will see that I say he is speaking against his very own church. To tell me that I should take meanings of things from certain members as not meaning what they say would encourage me to never take his word. Nulla | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 142 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.241 |
joesdad, thanks for the link, but that site states clearly it does not represent the beliefs of the mormons. So where does that leave us? Can you direct people to a site that shows the current prophets teachings. It has been made apparent that anything a prior prophet said can be changed. Don't you believe the current one would be the best? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 143 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.241 |
Perhaps people have to wait until the new book comes out "celebrating 200 years of mormonism". Would that be a fair assumption? There is nothing wrong with not knowing the answers to questions. None of us will ever have all the answers on this earth. Even Hinkley has admitted during an interview (I think to a LA journalist) that "we" aren't sure. Was he speaking then as a prophet, seer and revelator of the mormon church, or just a man's opinion? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 144 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.53.241 |
I would also love to see the proof in the bom that shows there is no incontrovertible proof that christianity is true. Solopilot has had over a week to edit his post. It isn't like he hasn't been posting since then. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 309 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
NULLA: I CAN'T FIND IT AT THE MOMENT (0N ANOTHER THREAD?) BUT I THINK SP ASKED YOU A QUESTION - NOT MADE A STATEMENT (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG) ASKING WHICH VERSION OF THE AGE OF THE EARTH YOU BELIEVED IN - OBVIOUSLY THE TWO ARE NOT THE SAME (I.E. A QUESTION DOES NOT INDICATE WHAT A PERSON BELIEVES, BUT IS TO OBTAIN INFORMATION FROM THE PERSON BEING ASKED THE QUESTION). I AM SURE HE WILL CONFIRM EITHER WAY AS AND WHEN HE CAN OR WANTS TO | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 155 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.51.11 |
joesdad, you are fairly consistant. First you are 'certain' about what sp says, and now you are 'sure'. Why have you gone from defending the mormon church to defending sp? Was he YOUR only defence mechanism on these threads? Your comments are ludicrous because sp started the threads in question titled 'still waiting for proof'. Sounds like he THOUGHT he had a pretty strong confidence that whatever christians said could be refuted by him (his opinions). I think YOU are still waiting and hoping that sp can come up with 'the proof' he has been unable to. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 156 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.51.11 |
Mormons will go to 'any port in a storm', whereas christians have the assurance, "He brings them into their desired haven." | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 544 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
Nulla: Sorry, but most Christians claim that the Bible is complete, that it is inerrant and accurate. If I have mistaken your doctrines, please say here and now that you the bible is NOT 100% complete, inerrant and accurate. Warning, though, as soon as you do, your fellow anti-Mormons will rip you to shreds for your "heresy." One constant is that you folks eat your wounded. ;) Looking at your next post, it seems that you do, in fact, believe that the Earth is older than the Biblical scholars have spent millennia saying that it is. cjv: When you decide that I am wrong because I don't share your beliefs, it is up to you to prove your beliefs (which are not shared by the majority of the world's population) to be accurate. We challenged "good Christians" on slavery, which they had been practicing for over 1000 years. The first abolitionist society in the world was founded by a non-Christian, and Christians kept the Declaration of Independence from being ratified until anti-slavery language was removed from it, keeping slavery legal all through the United States. From what you say, slavery should still be the law of the land, simply because emancipation didn't come along until 40 years after Mormonism did. Joe: You're right, I'm simply asking Nulla to decide what Nulla believes, rather than letting some preacher decide what Nulla believes. I also want a clear statement as to what those beliefs are in regard to the age of the Earth, because they appear to contradict each other. Nulla claims that "the" DNA evidence proves the Book of Mormon wrong, yet ducks from the fact that the same evidence proves the Bible wrong. If Nulla is a Bible believer, then the DNA evidence is inadmissible (you can't use evidence which you don't believe to be true). Again, it goes to the proof issue. They must prove theirs to be the standard, or their "judgement" that we are wrong is just hot air. | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 113 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
quote: "Mormons will go to 'any port in a storm'" hmm, they must have all been sailors with a girl in every port!  | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 546 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
Don't tell Gemma!!!! ;) | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 139 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. There is no DNA evidence to support the BoM There is no Archaeological evidence to support the BoM If you take those statements as proving the BoM is false then live with your own interpretations instead of using the bible as you do in an attempt to make the BoM seem believable. Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 319 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Curious1: So what would you do in a storm?, wait till your boat was smashed against the rocks because of some idiotic beliefs about Mormons fed to you, or found on some web page chucked together from bits of others with no effort to discover the truth - I suppose you may find the end you deserve! - you could of course realise that the port is the safe place to be, and reject the anti-LDS bigotry and simply join us! Nulla: Are you saying that if these evidences were provided, you would accept the BoM and convert? | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 114 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
quote: "reject the anti-LDS bigotry and simply join us!" 2 Timothy 2:15, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." We are told to study the word, not the devil's lies. The truth is all that is necessary, it is not necessary to know the lie. I'll not discuss the devil's satanic and cultic lies under the guise of studying scripture. I'll not give satanic and cultic lies equal billing with the bible. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 322 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
curious1: Couldn't agree with you more | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 552 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
Nulla: There is no evidence of any type for the vast majority of what it in the Bible. There is no archaelogical or (independent) historic evidence that Jesus ever lived, which is one reason why 2/3 of the people on Earth think that you and I are both crazy. If you base your beliefs on "evidence," then you might be a Jew, but not a Christian. You're still telling me that I'm wrong because I don't agree with you, and still dodging the question of what proof that you have of being right. Curious: So, you're saying that you are too bigoted to take the chance that you would discover that you are wrong. Sounds like you already know that you are wrong, but are afraid to admit it. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 171 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.15 |
solopilot now calls christianity bigotry. When he named this post, he made the statement he lives by "I'm still waiting....." Christians are not waiting. We live the evidence by the Holy Spirit in us, thanks be to God. | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 118 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
quote: "There is no evidence of any type for the vast majority of what it in the Bible. There is no archaelogical or (independent) historic evidence that Jesus ever lived" WoW! Is the author of those quotes ever living in a vacuum of isolation! The archeological evidences are overwhelming. Among other plentiful sources, check out the online version of Biblical Archeology. quote: "2/3 of the people on Earth think that you and I are both crazy" Irrelevant as 2/3 of the earth's population are non-believers and, without the spiritual mind their logic is really illogical. | ||
| egk (egk) Intermediate Member Username: egk Post Number: 151 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 147.72.101.2 |
Solopilot, I'm assuming that you missed the question from a previous post. I'm reposting it. egk: As I've mentioned before, our doctrine is that we came to Earth life in order to gain experience, to live by (or without) faith. If the Scriptures were perfect and complete, if we had PROOF of what we believe, we could not live by faith. We would not learn for ourselves. Then why do we need a prophet? EGK | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 140 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. when I stated what I have many times in these threads that there is no evidence to support the BoM it is you who has uses the bible in all your efforts to state otherwise. This site is factnet. If you have trouble with them and science then live with it. Why not as other Mormons do in stating they agree with that and live in hope along with their faith. But no not you.. you have to try and belittle both the lds and the bible. Read your posts solopilot. If there is no evidence that jesus never lived it does not take the bible away... there is evidence that jews lived... I am not asking for evidence that Nephi lived. I am asking for evidence that 5 million of his people lived. Different altogether than what you try and place before us. Fact. No evidence jesus lived archaelogical or dna. result. ???? Fact. No evidence Adam lived archaelogical or dna. Result. ??? Fact. No Archaeological evidence or DNA evidence to support the BoM and all its contents regarding anything to do with the Nephites, millions of people who flourished in the Americas for more than a thousand years. Not one skeletal remain, no DNA blood in remaining american natives, not one scrap of metal from the irons they produced. Not one building. yep sure... very close comparison Solopilot. Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 141 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
And before someone jumps to conclusions. There is DNA evidence and heaps of archaeological evidence plus many written records that the jews exist and did so during jesus's times. Nephi? Mormon? Nulla? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 173 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.51.250 |
Evidence for Jesus Christ From the pages of Jewish Historian Josephus we learn that Jesus was executed by Roman authority under Pontius Pilate by means of crucifixion and according to Tacitus, Roman historian, he also names Pontius Pilate as the one responsible for Jesus' execution by crucifixion. According to both Josephus and a Syrian writer, Mara Bar-Serapion, the Jewish authorities participated in the events leading up to the crucifixion of Jesus, and they justified this as a proper undertaking against a heretic. So in extra-biblical sources, Jewish and Roman, we have evidence for the trial of Jesus; the involvement of both the jewish author as well as the Roman authorities, the mode of his execution, namely by crucifixion. And these facts are fixed so firmly as an and/or point in history no historical scholar, no historian, denies these. On the contrary, they are so firmly fixed they actually become a criterion for authenticity. The renowned Jewish archaelogist, Nelson Glueck wrote, "It may be stated categorically that no archaelogical discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference. In AD 367, Athanasius formally tested the twenty-seven New Testament books (the same list that we have today). Soon after, Jerome and Augustine circulated this same list. The Gospel of Thomas was written around 140 AD long after Thomas had died. It contained wildly different messages, and therefore was not considered scripture. --from everystudent.com | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 174 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.51.250 |
This report was delivered to a college audience on December, 2001, by Dr. William L. Craig | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 143 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. "You're still telling me that I'm wrong because I don't agree with you, and still dodging the question of what proof that you have of being right. " The proof I have of being correct is the very same proof that you deny that the lds church and the lds BYU advertise on the internet. I am sorry that js and the lds have placed your sole in this position. You only need to look at your own church for what answers you seek in me regarding the bible and the science. I have answered and answered and answered again, if you still feel I am wrong then your lds is also wrong and you will be stating that not me. Which one is it. Your view or the LDS view that is correct. I do not have trouble believing in both, your lds faith does not have trouble though they prefer not to talk about it and my family that are mormons when they last allowed me to talk to them believed in the science that they were taught at medical school. Keep telling me and the everyone reading this thread that I cannot believe in both, I can live with it, its apparent you cannot and are torn between your faith and reality. Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 144 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
My third or fourth post on this.... Is the book of Abraham and its contents as translated by js the true and correct translation of Egyptian hieroglyphics as depicted on the papyrus ? Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 146 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad: "NULLA: I CAN'T FIND IT AT THE MOMENT (0N ANOTHER THREAD?) BUT I THINK SP ASKED YOU A QUESTION - NOT MADE A STATEMENT (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG) ASKING WHICH VERSION OF THE AGE OF THE EARTH YOU BELIEVED IN - OBVIOUSLY THE TWO ARE NOT THE SAME" These are some of the so called questions that do not make statements against the bible or DNA. I have added the comments in brackets. "If you believe the Bible to be 100% complete, accurate and inerrant, than you can't believe the DNA or the Smithsonian. (How come the lds state the bible is the word of god... how come the BYU have the same results as mainstream science?) Nulla: The DNA which you are relying on says that there is no Hebrew lineage in the native Americans, at least not as far back as 11,000 years ago, which is when the land bridge was last above water. It seems to disprove the Book of Mormon AND the Bible. ( here he attempts to justify that the DNA proves the bom false then it must also prove the bible as false.) And to Grace Grace: My whole point on the scientific evidence is that it can only be used to "prove" something about Mormonism if you are willing to take science at a higher value than the Bible. You decide which you are going to accept, then I will argue on that level, but I'm not going to let anti-Mormons base their agruments on evidence that they can't believe to be true. So which is it? I don't believe the DNA evidence any more than I believe the Bible to be 100% accurate, inerrant and complete. (here Solopilot states that I or other anti mormons cannot base our claims on evidence that cannot be true...which are the very same claims the lds makes) according to the Bible, we are all of Middle Eastern descent -- moreover, we are all descended of the handful who were aboard the Ark, only 4,700 years (230 generations) ago. Why doesn't this show up in DNA tests which claim to prove that American tribes came from Asia three times as long ago? There are only two possibilities -- first, the Bible is in error, second, the DNA test is in error. Which do you prefer? " (here solopilot states they are both in error) Just like in the last statement, Solopilot states his facts and tells me I have to choose one. Who in gods name is he to tell me I cannot believe in the Bible and DNA. Which do you believe in DNA or the Bible. Cant have both so which one Joesdad? Either answer will be speaking against the LDS doctrine. So Solpilot feels free to ask the same then deny he is speaking against his church. Solopilot cannot and will not accept my answer that I believe in both. If I cannot believe in both as he clearly states then neither can the lds. Or am I and other anti mormons different when it comes to this question? Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 327 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: You make the mistake of believing that DNA evidences are not fallable - it was not so long ago that the reliability of Carbon dating was questioned heavily, and the process itself ridiculed for wildly inaccurate results. Look at how far DNA tesing has come in the last 30 years, and tell me it has gone as far as it can! Can you assure me that the results you choose to depend on will not be altered amended or discredited in the next 30 or even 3 years? - no you cannot. Can you guarantee that those books and words missing or taken from the Bible will not be restored in their entirety to produce a book that you will reject - no you can't. Because the hitory books containing the names and actions of those mentioned in the BoM are only available in the Book itself does that prove it false, of course it does not. Because those evidence you will accept do not take you to the point you cannot reject them in proving the BoM should they be rejected, of course they should not. In reality, you suppose all these things not because the evidence has brought you to this point, but because they appear to prove a decision you have already made, influenced by your desire to attack rather than accept. SP asks you to choose, because you want to try and use both as evidence to support your claims - and he asks which you choose when they oppose each other. You have put yourself in the corner. I personally have no problem in choosing what I believe - DNA, given time, maybe more than I have will show that your snapshot view will show that all is not as you suppose it to be. We know through much greater minds than our that the Bible account of the creation cannot relate to any time spans either you or I attempt to place on it. So, simply speaking neither source will tell us of the origin of the early inhabitants of the Americas or of how old the earth is. | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 134 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
the courts consider DNA evidence certain enough to hang death penalty cases on it... there are those that place fictional writings of their own above that of the scriptures... then again, when others are willingly placed above Jesus Christ... 2 Thessalonians 2:11, "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 328 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
curious1: So I take it you will rely on one of your judges to determine your spiritual affairs? If you rely on DNA to the extent you seem, your second paragraph fits to a despciption description of yourself to a T. Such as your courts? | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 139 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
do you seek the truth or are you taking sides? | ||
| solopilot (solopilot) Advanced Member Username: solopilot Post Number: 562 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 216.190.204.31 |
Curious: Please provide ANY proof -- independent of Christianity -- of the existence of Christ. The Romans have no record. None. No reports that the Jews were talking of their long-awaited Messiah, who was supposed to drive out the Roman masters. No report of the execution of a man claiming to be the King of the Jews. No report of claims that the man had then been seen alive! ALL that we have is in the Scriptures (and you don't even know how we got them). All that we have is FAITH. Not proof. Unless you have some which has been overlooked. The closest which we can come are from Josephus, who wasn't even born until years after the Crucifixion. We have no original manuscripts of any of the books of the Bible, only copies of copies of copies. egk: You don't believe in the Prophet. You are exercising faith your way. We need prophets to guide us in a world which is rapidly changing. Each of the LDS prophets has brought a set of skills which were soon needed. Joseph was a farmer, he planted the seed. Brigham was a carpenter, he worked with potential and raw materials to build. Our current prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, was in public relations and mass communication during his professional life, and was called as Prophet only months before the great explosion in communications, with 1,000,000,000 satellite dishes in use and the Internet having such power that it could unseat Dan Rather. Nulla: When have I ever said that the Church and BYU don't advertise on the Internet? We have always said that the Bible is the word of God, so far as it is translated correctly. We have never said anything else. Stop putting words in my mouth. As far as the Book of Abraham, no -- but that is not all of the papyrus which Joseph had, it was one illustration. Joseph translated from sections which included red dye in the ink, and the sections which were permitted to be reproduced had only black dye. The illustration is an illumination, not the source manuscript. In fact, the papyrus dates back to about the time of the earliest known manuscripts of the New Testament, thus is also a copy of a copy of a copy. NULLA, HOW OLD DO YOU BELIEVE THE EARTH TO BE? I can't believe how hard it is to get you to stop dodging this and tell me what you believe the truth to be. It's not a really hard question to answer. You sing and dance as well as anyone I know, but ANSWER THE QUESTION or we will just assume that you know that your answer negates your argument. YES OR NO: Did we all come from Adam (the source of MidEastern genetics), 6,000 or so years ago? The Bible says yes, the DNA says no, what do YOU say? YES OR NO: Did we all come through Noah's shipmates, all of whom were Middle Eastern? The Bible says yes, the DNA says no, what do YOU say? What _I_ say is that the DNA is wrong. What do YOU say? You cannot believe both because they are directly contradictory. Curious: Courts have also convicted people on the basis of the "infallibility" of traffic radar. I have a friend who runs a motor-traffic squad, and he has shown me a tree which was clocked at 40 mph. Another friend of mine got a radar ticket, then using a radar gun got a speed reading of his car with the engine off, in park, with one foot on the ground, because of his ham radio. The problem with courts is that judges are people too. They are not perfect. The decide based on what seems to be the most reasonable explanation. No court would accept the New Testament as true, because there is no evidence outside of Christianity to support it. Yet you and I both believe it to be true. You believe it to be completely true, I believe it to be mostly true, but no judge in court could find it to be true, unless he or she was violating the oath of impartiality. However, since you are hinging an argument on the court accepting DNA evidence, does that mean that you believe that the Biblical account of the Flood and Adam and Eve are not true, because the DNA says that people have been around longer? What do you believe about evolution? From http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/overview/overvw1.html "But human DNA is surprisingly similar to, and almost identical with, the DNA of chimps and gorillas; both ape species have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. Chimpanzees even share the same ABO blood types with humans, and thus appear to be very close kin to us." | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 329 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Curious1: Both | ||
| yaakov (yaakov) Intermediate Member Username: yaakov Post Number: 373 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 63.148.234.6 |
Solopilot The Romans have no record. None. No reports that the Jews were talking of their long-awaited Messiah, who was supposed to drive out the Roman masters. No report of the execution of a man claiming to be the King of the Jews. No report of claims that the man had then been seen alive! Also no earthquakes, no census, and no dead people walking around Jerusalem. ALL that we have is in the Scriptures (and you don't even know how we got them). All that we have is FAITH. Not proof. Unless you have some which has been overlooked. The closest which we can come are from Josephus, who wasn't even born until years after the Crucifixion. We have no original manuscripts of any of the books of the Bible, only copies of copies of copies. Even those copies are suspect. The story about the Jews translating the Greek for the Septuagint is only about the first 5 books (the Torah). The rest is of unknown origin, as lots of Greek copies were made of books by different people. It underwent "corrections" by early church fathers such as Origen and St. Lucien, since so many different copies were around. The current printed versions are from the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus, and the Codex Sinaiticus, all of which were written by Christians. In addition, the first five books of Moses in the Septuagint, were so corrupted over time that the "modern" Septuagint is highly suspected as being different as originally translated. The Xians themselves knew this and early church father, Origen, (325 CE) tried to compile one decent translation out of eight translations. This effort is known as the Hexapla. The Hexapla contained, 1st, the Hebrew text; 2nd, the Hebrew text expressed in Greek characters; 3rd, the version of Aquila; 4th, that of Symmachus; 5th, the Septuagint; 6th, Theodotion. Origen said: "And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery! [A letter from Origen to Africanus, Volume 4 of the Early Church Fathers CD Rom] | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 147 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. NULLA, HOW OLD DO YOU BELIEVE THE EARTH TO BE? "I can't believe how hard it is to get you to stop dodging this and tell me what you believe the truth to be. It's not a really hard question to answer. You sing and dance as well as anyone I know, but ANSWER THE QUESTION or we will just assume that you know that your answer negates your argument. " Assume whatever you like. I answer all my questions. I AGREE WITH SCIENCE IN ITS ESTIMATE OF THE AGE OF EARTH AND THE UNIVERSE no dodging.... never haave never will I walk hand in hand with god, the holy bible and science. Something you cannot agree to or do. get a grip on reality Solopilot. If the holy bible is the word of god then why do you need an unproven BoM as scripture. To be christian or not it is one or the other, cannot possibly be both So Solopilot which one is it The BoM, or The Holy Bible? Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 355 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: Both SP and I have asked which you would choose the Bible or your embryonic scientific theories when they disagree - you say both - Hmmphh - if you can't dodge, just confuse yourself and all will seem clear. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 148 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad Solopilot is attempting to make either science or the bible as being false. He has stated clearly his intentions. SP wrote "My whole point on the scientific evidence is that it can only be used to "prove" something about Mormonism if you are willing to take science at a higher value than the Bible. You decide which you are going to accept, then I will argue on that level, but I'm not going to let anti-Mormons base their agruments on evidence that they can't believe to be true. So which is it? I don't believe the DNA evidence any more than I believe the Bible to be 100% accurate, inerrant and complete. “ If both are used and taught within the lds system then I am at a loss for your both. It is you and SP that have dodged weaved and tried to produce or make evidence seem relevant to the point of actually looking like the BoM has any DNA or Archaeological evidence. Joesdad: “SP asks you to choose, because you want to try and use both as evidence to support your claims – “ What evidence Joesdad.? My claims are there is no evidence to support the Bom. You Wrote; “Because the hitory books containing the names and actions of those mentioned in the BoM are only available in the Book itself does that prove it false.”.” But it does not prove it true The same goes for the Jedhi Knights and the characters in Lord Of The Rings You Wrote; “and he asks which you choose when they oppose each other. “ What opposes what? DNA show that the genes are asian. How does that oppose the Bible? You Wrote; “You have put yourself in the corner.” What corner.? I believe in the bible and I believe in the DNA evidence. This is the same claims that your LDS have painted themselves in a corner with. Joesdad; “so simply speaking neither source will tell us of the origin of the early inhabitants of the Americas or of how old the earth is.” If there is no DNA at all the BoM is telling us a different story than what the history of America shows. Then what happens when you turn to Archaeology? Now DNA is showing that there is no evidence to support it. Is this a false statement that I make? If so I again ask prove it? You wrote; "DNA, given time, maybe more than I have will show that your snapshot view will show that all is not as you suppose it to be." So do you believe that there is DNA evidence to support the BoM or not? If not then if DNA is found to support the BoM your views will not change? Or is it a case I do not believe in science now, but I reserve the right to change my views if in favour of the BoM? Are you telling me that the whole world of DNA and its science are false? I work in a major Hospital, among some of the most brilliant heart surgeons and medical professors in Australia, some are world renown. I talk with them when they come to the Pathology Dept. Two of these I know are devout Christians, I have met them in the Hospital Chapel. Both walk hand in hand with science, the bible and Jesus Christ. The gift bestowed upon them by god to be able to save so many lives is a blessing to mankind. I am not going to walk away from such people, nor will god walk away from such people who choose medicine and science as their profession. The hospital chaplin speaks a different tongue than you and SP talk I along with other christians such as great men like these surgeons are not going to be told by you or SP that I cannot believe in the DNA findings and be a Christian at the same time and hold the word of god as true. If you need professional advice regarding DNA I would be happy to link you up with Professor Buxton or Professor Ron Dick at the Epworth Hospital where I am employed. http://www.epworth.org.au/index.htm Nulla (Message edited by nulla on May 28, 2005) | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 149 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
From. http://www.mormon.org/learn/0,8672,1090-1,00.html The Bible testifies of Jesus Christ and has influenced and sustained millions of His followers. It is a collection of sacred writings containing God’s revelations and accounts of His dealings with His children. The historical accounts in the Bible cover many centuries, from the time of Adam through the death of the Apostles. From http://home.byu.edu/webapp/home/index.jsp Welcome to the Brigham Young University DNA Sequencing Center. Please feel free to explore the site. If you are already a registered user, you can Login. Otherwise, you can may create an account. The DNA Sequencing Center (DNASC) at Brigham Young University was established to help researchers and students, both at BYU as well as other institutions, process DNA samples in an efficient and economical manner. By centralizing equipment and expertise, we have dramatically reduced the overall expense to the University and to individual labs for DNA research, while increasing the efficiency and quality of the data generated. The DNASC is committed to serving the scientific community by providing advanced, efficient, and economical services for DNA sequence and DNA fragment acquisition and analysis. Some of the services provided by the DNASC include: • Custom DNA Sequencing • DNA Fragment Analysis • Sequencing and PCR troubleshooting and training workshops • SNP analysis • Primer walking • Contig assembly and editing The DNASC is supported by Brigham Young University through the Department of Integrative Biology under the direction of Dr. Michael F. Whiting. Day to day operations are managed by a full-time Head Technician, Helaman Escobar. Are Joesdad and Solopilot members of the LDS or is there other sites I should be referred to as an antimormon seeking what the mormon official view is. I am told I am painting myself into a corner.... well the paint must be jetdry.. as I keep walking back to my PC to find info such as above. Nulla (Message edited by nulla on May 27, 2005) | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 150 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot; ”We have always said that the Bible is the word of God, so far as it is translated correctly. We have never said anything else. Stop putting words in my mouth.” You wrote in this thread Nulla: There is no evidence of any type for the vast majority of what it in the Bible. Solopilot; “YES OR NO: Did we all come from Adam (the source of MidEastern genetics), 6,000 or so years ago? The Bible says yes, the DNA says no, what do YOU say? YES OR NO: Did we all come through Noah's shipmates, all of whom were Middle Eastern? The Bible says yes, the DNA says no, what do YOU say? What _I_ say is that the DNA is wrong. What do YOU say? You cannot believe both because they are directly contradictory. Please show me the DNA tests that were conducted to prove the claims you are making. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 151 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot; “Nulla claims that "the" DNA evidence proves the Book of Mormon wrong, yet ducks from the fact that the same evidence proves the Bible wrong. I claim that there is no DNA evidence to support the BoM Apart from that … the “same evidence” you mention I assume is DNA then how come DNA proves that Israelites lived?. If you duck and weave from this fact then you and millions of mormons can never ever claim Israelite genes to be true if found in the Americas. How come DNA supports the bible claims that Romans lived? Do I have to go through the Archaeolocial claims that support the bible. In ignoring all these claims of DNA support that can be made and proven then your “Nulla claims that "the" DNA evidence proves the Book of Mormon wrong, yet ducks from the fact that the same evidence proves the Bible wrong” is incorrect It is you and your endeavors to rubbish the word of god in claiming that DNA evidence does not support the bible not me… never have and never will. If DNA evidence does not support the BoM.. you need to learn to live with it Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 153 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot. can you please supply the source for this claim about the papyrus. "Joseph translated from sections which included red dye in the ink, and the sections which were permitted to be reproduced had only black dye. The illustration is an illumination, not the source manuscript." Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 154 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Solopilot; Again re the papyrus you wrote and state as fact. "In fact, the papyrus dates back to about the time of the earliest known manuscripts of the New Testament, thus is also a copy of a copy of a copy. I repeat "IN FACT" I do hope to uphold your veiw and arguement that science cannot be used by myself on one hand then believe the bible on the other that your source of fact for your above claim is not SCIENTIFIC. or your partner may help with advice Joesdad; "Nulla: You make the mistake of believing that DNA evidences are not fallable - it was not so long ago that the reliability of Carbon dating was questioned heavily, and the process itself ridiculed for wildly inaccurate results." Nulla | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 156 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
I suggest anyone having interest in the DNA debate. http://www.mormonchallenge.com/challenge/video.htm Nulla | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 168 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
quote "the Mormon Church teaches that one's sexual orientation is changeable"-http://www.equalityride.com/article.php?article_id=25 Dear student or alumni of Brigham Young University, Welcome to the Equality Ride website. We are working towards acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) students at religious and military schools such as Brigham Young University. http://www.equalityride.com/student_stories.php?school_id=7 Mormonism, as with all cults, continually changes over time to keep up with man's ever increasing filthy lusts. The Word of God is timeless and unchanging. "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."-2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 199 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.130 |
Brigham Young follows the military's previous advice of "don't tell", concerning the above post by curious1. According to the article, gays and lesbians are welcome on B.Y.U. campus but if are caught in homosexual practices, will be expelled. I find that hypocritical. | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 171 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
Hypocrisy is the cult's stock in trade. | ||
| curious1 (curious1) Intermediate Member Username: curious1 Post Number: 172 Registered: 5-2005 Posted From: 70.185.109.254 |
quote: ”We have always said that the Bible is the word of God, so far as it is translated correctly." uh huh, the Word of God is translated incorrectly ONLY when it disagrees with Mormonism, JW's, Christian Science, 7thDA, et al boys and girls can you pronounce r-e-l-a-t-i-v-e--t-r-u-t-h ? | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 363 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: Talk about ducking and diving - are you so silly as to think that by taking what I say a bit at a time and questioning it you can pretend your intentions are not clear? You know what you have said, so do I if you can't remember then re read it. Then again read what I said. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 159 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad. I have for all of this and all the other threads stated that. I believe there is no DNA evidence to support the BoM. I believe in the Holy Bible. You say I cannot believe both. I say I can. If that is ducking and weaving bad luck I have shown clearly that your LDS also shows the same. You can keep saying all you like to try and make me look the fool. I do not have to choose between either because you and SP have trouble coming to terms with the fact. Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 367 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nula: I have not (so far as I am aware) said you cannot believe both, in fact I have made my opinion equally as clear - you do though, I believe, confuse questions with statements, and statements regarding your convictions confused with statements of LDS beliefs. Simply because a question states something about YOUR belief, challenging you to prove otherwise, it does not mean that the questioner holds an opposite opinion. Often the questions that I (and I believe SP also) ask are to challenge the way you have come to your conclusions, rather than to suggest ALL of them are wrong (as by doing this we hope you will see that you are relying upon sources and statements that are in themselves unreliable and unsupported, and therefore will effect the overall conclusion). I have no desire to make you look foolish. | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 160 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad; I do not confuse the question at hand Joesdad, it is not my intent to take meanings wrong. If you yourself have not stated that I must choose between either then I take my remark stating so back. You have however showed support to Solopilot in his questions along these lines. You still state much the same telling me I cannot rely on the results and that they are unsupported. When I ask for the proof on your side I am given replies that I am ducking and weaving and avoiding. To say there is no DNA evidence to support the BoM is stating what findings there are. For me to say to you I think the tests are wrong is like saying to somebody they have had their blood test and they are clear of cancer, but in fact they do have cancer. Have you or family members ever had a blood test? Have you found them unreliable? Would you believe and live in hope for a good result if you were needle pricked and then relied on results for aids? Well DNA is more conclusive than your run of the mill blood test. You may one day need to place some faith in a surgeon and rely upon scientific methods to assist a life threatening situation. I do not see why you and SP are wanting to put down the DNA methods. You should be looking at why there are no results in favour instead of blaming the means as to why they have come to these conclusions . A good tradesman doesn't blame his tools. I understand fully that the questions meaning is to ask me to decide between the bible and what science shows and because I do not choose to do so the debate goes on. To be asked to state that I do not believe in the bible as a christian is quite stupid, I would not be here wearing the team colours. If I were to decide that I cannot rely on science then I would not turn up for work tomorrow. All the blood test results that I see and perform would be to no avail. I have said somewhere in this and other threads that I do not and cannot deny a persons their faith. If faith alone is given as a reply then I say so be it. It does not as well take away facts and they should be allowed to be discusssed. LDS Apostle named Orson Pratt confidently laid a challenge before the world: "...convince of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the Word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information. Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 373 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: I am disappointed that you will not be at work tomorrow - if you judge science by the same rule as you judge Mormonism, the changes in scientific thinking in just the last 10 years would see you condemning it - only because you are blissfully unaware of the need for the change. How many of the processes you go through each day at work are the result of changes as those that are in the know, have realised there are betters ways of doing things? I take it you no longer bleed people to cure them from piles (an silly example but one you would have relied on not so long ago!)? So your knowledge of DNA is so firm as to allow you to rely upon it as firmly as your beliefs in the Bible? A few years back I suffered from terrible stomach pains. My GP diagnosed a urinary tract infection, and prescribed the necessary medication. In 2 months I lost nearly 35 pounds in weight, and the pains were so severe I had to leave work early just about every day. Blood tests were done, urine tests were done, I was prodded and pocked. But the pain got worse, and my wife was convinced it was bowel cancer, as were many friends and family. Finally I was referred to a gastro surgeon who, with one prod and then a simple stomach scan turned this theory on it's head - I have Crohns disease! The first "scientist" got it so wrong as to nearly cost me my life. The second after removing a good chunk of my small intestine and half of the large, stop the pain. In fact, I have probably had it since I was in my early teens, and that lack of knowledge about the conditions, and assumptions had me suffering from nervous cramps and IBD - lots of disgusting medication and misery. Scientists are NOT as reliable as God, they get it wrong over and over again, but God inspires some to do the great work that their followers rely on to get it right - we only ever know which is which afterwards. I believe that God inspired Joseph Smith for a great work which he achieve the best he could, being the human he was. I agree with Brother Pratt, but you can't expect us to just agree with whatever you think is the most convincing arguement. It's the truth we are seeking, not the most convenient way round life's problems. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 220 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.153 |
God inspires me to do a great work in ministering to mormons, in order to show we are saved by grace, and not by works, in case any man should boast, as js did. I would like to see one statement that any of the Mormon prophets made that so inspires men to join their church, that is not already in God's Holy Word, the Holy Bible. Many men have inspired me, but Jesus Christ is the only one who has inspired me enough to want to become a member of His family. And He did that not by writing any books. Until factnet can work out its present glitches, these conversations can be continued at http://cultbusters.com.au. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 221 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.153 |
joesdad, you asked me to answer on 'mormonism attacks Christianity', which I did. I notice you have no rebuttal for what I posted. Why is that? (you had enough time to post on several others.) | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 162 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.0.155.232 |
Joesdad, "Nulla: I am disappointed that you will not be at work tomorrow - if you judge science by the same rule as you judge Mormonism, the changes in scientific thinking in just the last 10 years would see you condemning it - " Sorry but I am back at work today, and sorry my bible is in hand as well. It is not good news to hear that you suffer from Crohn's desease. I know of it well as both my father and late brother had it. You would also be aware that it has a high incidence of gene related cases. What you are doing is taking a single case and using it as a basis for the whole of science. You are aware the first dr, got it wrong. The Doctor who got it right did not learn about Crohns desease in the BoM or other religious documents. Deny it and you deny that you have crohn's This disease if you talk about it with your doctor is not easy to detect because of the signs and symptons. Taken from. http://www.thedoctorsdoctor.com/diseases/crohns_disease.htm In 73% of cases Crohn's disease was diagnosed before the age of forty. The mean interval between the first clinical signs and the diagnosis was 3.3 years. In 57% of the patients the diagnosis was reached within one year. In nine patients the primary diagnosis was colitis ulcerosa. Most patient were anemic and were in the state of inflammation and/or catabolism suggested by low blood hemoglobin concentration and high ESR and CRP values on admission. So you can see that tests and results over a larger number of cases give a more reliable pic. Population testing for DNA is something that you refuse to accept. I would advise that you read of the process. JD; "So your knowledge of DNA is so firm as to allow you to rely upon it as firmly as your beliefs in the Bible? " So you do not believe you have crohns disease or do you believe in the Bible? I can give you many types of illness and disease that rely on science for life support. Are you willing to say we can firmly say that we can remove the machines or take people off medications. I can also say that I see many terminal patients and because we are not yet able to find cures for are placed in gods hand alone. This does not stop science from progressing. You cannot progress on false information and data. Thats what science is about. You are under the impression that the BoM is the word of god. I say it is not. You are living in hope that in the future a different result will come about, or you will remain in total denial of DNA. No matter what I say to you it will not produce DNA in your favour unless DNA is used as a means of testing. If DNA testing can improve it can only do so because of the knowledge science has of it today. Ignore or deny it and you will continue to ignore the future. Nulla | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 375 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: Glad you got to work, yes I have thought about the possibility of my children inheriting the condition - but have been told by the specialists here that there is no proven genetic link - I hope that there is no link! Your link between the Dr and the BoM is of course rediculous. Why play about with what I say in such a way? Of course I was making a point that science is only as good as the knowledge of those doing the research, their abilities to recognise the results they obtain for what they are and of course the REASON they are undertaking the research in the first place. They are men (nd women) prone to mistakes and bias just like the rest of us. Take the DNA reports as what they are, an interpretation of the data obtained, not facts that prove something, with more research they may well decide to change their view - that is the nature of such "cutting edge" science, even the experts can't know where it is going to lead. If the research was undertaken to gain such proof, then of course that makes it the more unreliable in my book. Again you make a rediculous attempt to link things that deserve no link - my Crohns is a fact that has no link to the Bible - my statements leave a clear bridge between your reliance on DNA and your belief in the Bible, please reread it. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 377 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
Nulla: I have stated before, I am no expert on the tpic of DNA, but the lines of thinking I have, being a non scientist are still I believe valid. Just as you look for evidence that what I believe is wrong, and have your "huants" from where you extract information, I have looked though several papers written by LDS on this topic. Much of it goes over my head, as I'm no scientist either. But one I came across spoke my language, and pretty much picks out (but then properly discusses) the concerns I have with the theories you rely on. http://www.fairlds.org/apol/bom/bom07.html | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 167 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad, explain what theories I rely on that are wrong. Is there new DNA evidence? Number one Arguement The problems begin with the very first phrase. He says, "Now that quantitative scientific methods can indeed test for an Israelite genetic presence in ancient America..." Murphy poses this as a given, a fact. It is a "fact" that Dr. Woodward, a researcher in the field, does not accept: What did the genes of Lehi look like? How do we find out today what the genes of Lehi look like? I think that's a valid question to ask. Second is, who would you compare them with in living populations today? Where would you go to make the comparison? Would you go to modern day Israel today? What is the genetic composition of Israeli Jews today? Is it the same as it was two thousand years ago? Three thousand years ago? I would argue that it's not. Do we understand the population dynamics? What kinds of selection factors have been involved?14 And the answer by Murphy. The fact is, if Lehi did exist, then we would know what his genes looked like--the Book of Mormon clearly states that he was Israelite. The genetic testing on Native Americans would have revealed Near Eastern DNA, which would have included all Semitic peoples—Jews, Israelites, even Arabs. If the “principal ancestors of the Native Americans” were truly Lamanites, which according to the Book of Mormon are a remnant of the house of Israel, then there would by necessity be at least some surviving Hebrew or Semitic DNA in a statistically significant population sample, yet none has been found.. The” In the conclusion” from your site it says nothing whatsoever that denies that the DNA tests show no Nephite or Israelite genes. “The applicability to the Book of Mormon should be evident. The current state of historical genetics tells us what we already knew: the Book of Mormon does not explain the origins of all of the natives of the western hemisphere. However, it is no contradiction to the Book of Mormon, because that isn't what the Book of Mormon says. It is no contradiction of official Church doctrine, because the Church never had an official doctrine on Book of Mormon geography (or genetics). Your scholars are also saying the same as what I have. In my endeavors to say that No genetic evidence supports the BoM I have been answering on 2 or 3 different threads and in those posts most were in remarks defending the bible. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 226 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.55 |
I find it interesting that mormons say the JW's are Christians. I just got off a website where a member stated, "I would never say that Jesus is God." I wonder why mormons and JW's don't just join forces. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 227 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.55 |
"because the Church never had an official doctrine on book of Mormon geography (or genetics. Well, that's an odd statement considering I have seen with my own eyes a mormon rendering of where exactly the Nephites were, circled on a map of North and South America. Also, I have read mormon documents stating the region of Cumorah. The article is titled 'Cumorah, Cumorah'. It speaks about the unimportance of where Cumorah is located, (could have been North America, or South America). The mormons are trying to say these things aren't important. If they don't consider them to be of importance, then why are mormons arguing for them? | ||
| nulla (nulla) Intermediate Member Username: nulla Post Number: 168 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 202.173.180.87 |
Joesdad regarding your earlier post; Again you make a rediculous attempt to link things that deserve no link - my Crohns is a fact that has no link to the Bible – If your Crohns is a fact then how was that fact achieved. My point shows that it was through science and not by religious means yet you accept it is fact. DNA is achieved through scientific means that I accept as fact yet I was continually linked to the bible with comments from mormons like “its DNA or the Bible… cant be both one contradicts the other etc etc” Ignore the fact you have crohns for ten years and wait maybe the results then would be different. You may hate and detest my links which you feel mean nothing. I have been trying for weeks to show that if DNA shows no evidence of Nephites both you and solopilot choose to ignore science. Yet the same science can be used by you both when it suits. Hence my comment ” do you believe in Crohns (a scientific result) or the Bible.” Your comments that it is a ridiculous link shows exactly how I have felt with you and SP making the same types of links with DNA.. Also in an ealier post you stated that you never made reference to the question of choosing one or the other. I stated if that is the case then I take it back. In reading back through this thread alone. "Nula: I have not (so far as I am aware) said you cannot believe both, in fact I have made my opinion equally as clear - you do though, I believe, confuse questions with statements, and statements regarding your convictions confused with statements of LDS beliefs. " and here you state clearly; "Nulla: Both SP and I have asked which you would choose the Bible or your embryonic scientific theories when they disagree - you say both - Hmmphh - if you can't dodge, just confuse yourself and all will seem clear. Nulla (Message edited by nulla on June 03, 2005) | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 229 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.213 |
Here is my most recent example of what I hear from my Mother who has been a member of the mormon church for forty-five years.My stepfather passed away about ten years ago. He also was a mormon. I have mentioned before that Mom prays to him. Joesdad said I must have misunderstood her. I emailed my daughters and Mom yesterday about an injury I have and asked for their prayers. Our prayers were answered and I was so pleased I emailed all of them and thanked them for praying for me. This is my mother's response which I received a few minutes ago: I thank Heavinly Father and Waldo (Waldo as our guardian angel). He has the priesthood authority to do this-so he does not do it but just like in mortality he had this authoriy to pray for blessings. (He is blessed to do it now spriitually), that your leg is better. ...grammer and punctuation hers, gc If any mormon wants to call me a liar about this message, I will forward it to friends I have here and they can verify it for you nonbelievers. This is what mormonism has done to my Mother, and the reason I despise it so. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 230 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.64 |
Now I see where Mom gets the idea that when we die we become guardian angels. 2 Nephi 9:8-9 O the wisdom of God, his mercy and grace! For behold, If the flesh should rise no more our spirits must become subject to that angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the devil, to rise no more. And our spirits must have become like unto him, and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himnself; yea, to that being who beguiled our first parents, who transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness. How can a man become an angel? How can an angel then become a god? Oh Lord, have mercy on them! | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 231 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.64 |
To learn about angels, please read Psalms 8:4-5, Psalms 91, Hebrews 2:9 A guardian angel is a heavenly spirit assigned by God to watch over us during our lives, from the time we are born. Our Lord said in the gospel, "Beware lest ye scandalize any of these little ones, for their angels in Heaven see the face of my Father." No man has seen the Father. Angels look face to face with God. Man is made lower than the angels. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 395 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
GC I did not, if I remember rightly I made it clear that I could not comment on what you say she says - principally because your ability to recount things is so unreliable - and said you should talk to her about it. Have you actually asked her, and told her how you mock her so openly to others? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 251 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.62.73 |
I do not mock my Mother. I mock her beliefs. My Mother has been brainwashed by the lds church. My ability, for your info, joed, is quite reliable. I was trained quite well to be a record-keeper. If you now want to attack my intelligence, you would find yourself typing 'errrr more often, and I will remind you that I stated unless I type the word jd, joesdad, etc., I am not posting for your benefit. You have been, since the time you started posting here, been able only rarely to answer any doctrinal or personal question put to you, so I would reconsider any attempt on your part to show people here how 'intelligent' you are by challenging me. | ||
| joesdad (joesdad) Intermediate Member Username: joesdad Post Number: 402 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 62.253.215.25 |
GC: You mock her beliefs? - that say volumes about you as a person, and the standards you profess as a "Christian". Hmm, I do recall you asking several times for details of my excommunication, to which I responded - what sensible doctrinal questions have you raised? Who has questioned anyone's level of intelligence, other than you in your childish attacks on mine? In fact, I do recall posting a description of who I imagine you to be and accrediting you with a good level of education - your false "recollections" are unhelpful. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 398 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.62.126 |
joesdad, if you are still reading the threads, you will see 'my false recollections' have been confirmed by many other sources. My level of education has nothing to do with any of this. Everything I have and am I credit God with. As should we all. It is His to give or take away. 'Whether I live or die I am the Lord's'! My life here is for His purpose, not mine. I am so grateful to a loving God who has helped me grow in the last six months. I want to make amends to all I have offended in my childish attempts to prove anyone wrong. Even while doing so I was aware only the Holy Spirit has that power, and I regret all my 'negative' responses. I have asked God to forgive me and am now asking any/all of you to also. In sincerity, Vivian | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 410 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.245 |
Still waiting for proof that your bel...The subject line pretty much says it, (by a mormon). Why would any person want to say they are a follower of Christ, join a church with the name of Christ in it; if they believe there is no proof that the very book that testifies of Him exists? | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 411 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.54.245 |
solopilot stated, "You can't even prove to me that Jesus ever lived." | ||
| sisterak (sisterak) New member Username: sisterak Post Number: 3 Registered: 7-2005 Posted From: 66.230.91.142 |
godchild...who or what is Nephi? That is not in my Bible. Has anyone else ever heard that Joseph Smith was taking drugs at the time of his "revelations" and that he possibly was having hallucinations and not "visions"? | ||
| turtle (turtle) Intermediate Member Username: turtle Post Number: 155 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 216.24.102.28 |
All of your arguments (and mine, for that matter) are essentially "You're wrong because I'm right," when they actually mean "I think you're wrong because I think I'm right." by solopilot Okay I was looking at this post on mormons mainly because i know little about your beliefs besides about Joseph Smith. I am not here to say you are wrong and I am right but what I like to ask is there any book of the old or new testament we will both agree that is correct. I am actually a pencostal with protestant background. So often groups that don't agree with protestant like Baptist will say that protestant bible is a lie. So with this said is there one book in the protestant bible you agree with word for word. (Message edited by turtle on July 18, 2005) | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 417 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.81 |
Sisterak, Nephi is one of the fictional persons in Joseph Smith's fictional book called the Book of Mormon. Mormon is another of joe smith's fictional characters. To mormons, the Book of mormon is another Bible, but they consider this one to contain the fulness of the gospel. They believe the Bible is correct, as far as it is translated, (meaning they only believe the parts that agree with their beiiefs). The fictional Nephi was part of a jewish family who came to America during biblical times. The Book of mormon is a fictional history of those times, including the belief that Jesus Christ came to America after he was resurrected to teach the Nephites, Lamanites, Labanites, etc. The real Eden is in America. God was a man and men can become god. It goes on and on. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 418 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.81 |
On the thirteenth thread here(lds contradictions with Christianity) lists many major differences between mormonism and christianity. Mormons claim to be christian. You can contact me with questions at vivart@cmextreme.com. signed, Vivian (I was a mormon from the age of 13 to 38.) When I heard God had sex with Mary (in church) and that men are going to be gods, and other mormon lies, I left. These are things people learning about mormonism BEFORE joining do not hear. Mormonism believes in progression, on earth and in heaven. You work for your salvation. There are 3 parts of heaven. God has a wife. So does Jesus. In fact, many wives. All the bible apostles had wives. In order to become a god, you have to be married in the mormon temple for eternity after completing other requirements including 10% tithe, attending all meetings, taking positions in the church, etc. | ||
| godchild (godchild) Intermediate Member Username: godchild Post Number: 419 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 64.28.63.81 |
We may not be hearing anymore from mormons on factnet. The General Authorities (head honchos) issued a command that all mormons pull their websites and stop posting until the church can 'approve' them. People are learning too much. They are the fastest growning church (as far as temples and churches (called wards and stakes). They have between 12.5 and 13 million members but probably 1/2 are inactive or children. They do not believe in birth control because we were all spirits in heaven and they are just waiting up there for someone here to give them a body. Sound too weird and creepy to be true? I can assure you it is. Until about 25-30 years ago, world communication was such that they could keep many things secret, but members started leaving and telling plus all the books the church has published are all over the place, much the their chagrin. | ||
| turtle (turtle) Intermediate Member Username: turtle Post Number: 156 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 216.24.102.17 |
We may not be hearing anymore from mormons on factnet. The General Authorities (head honchos) issued a command that all mormons pull their websites and stop posting until the church can 'approve' them. I would not have minde debating with them though godchild. But you have to find a common ground in which to debate to even come to any agreement. But I do not feel I would actually come to an agreement it is just a theory. | ||
| nobodyspecial (nobodyspecial) Junior Member Username: nobodyspecial Post Number: 30 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 64.147.9.111 |
GC: And you heard this where? Curious I've haven't heard any such "command" | ||
| turtle (turtle) Intermediate Member Username: turtle Post Number: 162 Registered: 1-2005 Posted From: 216.24.102.23 |
Nobody, Are you a mormon if so do you wish to discuss with me your beliefs. Can you answer my first question is there any book in my bible the KJV that you would would say is completely true as a mormon? |
