Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 'Christian'.

[Sonny]

I couldn't find the original so I copied and pasted it here.

It was a tragic event.

Yet no LDS has ever admitted guilt to it or apologized for committing the heinous act.

Here's the story of another equally tragic massacre:
I'm sure it would be safe to say that the majority of the population of Missouri in 1838 was Christian and that Governor Lillburn Boggs considered himself a Christian. He had an intense hatred of Mormonism and was in a position to be able to channel his hatred into law.

Oh, no, not another 'they persecuted us for no reason' spiel. Look! What happened at Haun's Mill was very sad and bad BUT... it simply is not how or what the LDS want you to think. Earlier in the month, October 24, 1838, the Mormons attacked/ambushed, as the Japs did in Dec. 1941, by surprise, the Missouri Militia (Today they'd be called the Missouri State Police). They killed one State Trooper and, before it was over Apostle David Patten (whom 'God' had called to go on a mission 'next' spring) was dead. So much for that Spring mission with 10 others. Patten was the only Mormon Apostle killed (more on that failed prophecy later). The Militia regrouped and came after the Mormons who had started the battle (they were in a war called the 'Mormon War of 1838'). On the 30th they thot they had found the Mormons who attacked them. They began firing and many people were killed. First- had the Mormons not attacked the State militia this tragedy would have never happen. Thanks, LDS. Second- there were armed Mormons at Haun's Mill- a fact the LDS always seem to leave out of their version of the story.
Slow down a second here... When the LDS came into the state of Missouri they were welcomed with open arms, basically. Fact is, everyone in nearly every state allowed them to come in and set up house. If you hated someone so bad that you wanted to kill them would you allow them to come in to your state/city, set up house (prepare for war) then go kill them or would you attack them as they were travelling when they were at their absolute weakest point? See, the LDS never mention all of that. They just blame everyone for their hardships. They should blame the leaders of their church...but that will never happen. Anyway, the LDS were allowed to come in and then trouble always started. consider this- if every time a group moved somewhere there was fighting and killing and the only constant was the Mormons would you really blame every person in every state/city for what occurred? Or, would you say 'It must be the one constant' (Mormons) since they were always allowed to move in, set up house then the fighting began. One would, in my opinion, have to be an idiot to think or say that that all of those people in every one of those states were to blame. Now, contrast that to the MMM. The Mormons could have been exterminated in Missouri but they were allowed to leave- even though it was the Mormons, on July 4, 1838 who declared a war of extermination then spread their Extermination Order. Gov. Boggs, who was shot in the head (wonder by whom?), did not immediately act upon the Mormons declaration of war with that EO. He waited and tried to calm everyone and end the hate and killing. Hey, he waited nearly 4 months! Finally- and bc the Mormons were, imo, rabidly war-like, he declared on Oct. 27, 1838 (remember, the Mormons issued their EO 'first' and more than 3 months before Boggs gave his) Gov Boggs issued his EO- Mo. had finally had enough of the trouble-makers. MM the settlers had surrendered all of their weapons bc the LDS came out with a white flag. Then, they were slaughtered! I sure wish the real truth of this 'war' MMM would catch on.

Here's the kind of thing the laws he sanctioned permitted...

"Feeling justified by the orders of his own governor, on October 30, [1838] Colonel William O. Jennings of the Missouri state militia took 240 men and attacked the tiny LDS settlement of Haun's Mill on Shoal Creek in remote eastern Caldwell County. Having been forced to surrender all weapons in the settlement five days before as part of a "truce," Joseph Smith had in fact counseled Jacob Haun to desert the settlement and bring his people to Far West. Assuming the truce was authentic, and thinking it cowardly to abandon the settlement, Haun instead told his follows it was the Prophet's counsel that they endeavor to maintain the place. Thus most of the settlers were waiting quietly at the doors of their homes when Jenning's men rode into view. When three horsemen lurched forward, guns blazing, the women and children fled south across a frozen stream into the woods. Mary Stedwell was one of the first hit as they ran, in the hand, but she fell over a log into which the horsemen sent more than a dozen lead balls. Another dozen women and children were hit as they ran. But Jennings wanted the men, most of whom had rushed for position inside the blacksmith shop. The mobbers thrust their muskets through the cracks in the widely spaced logs and fired, killing seventeen men and small boys.

Although the massacre was over within minutes, many wounded lay dying. Sixty-two-year-old Thomas McBride was on his back in the dirt, his gun laying at his side. A militiaman, William Rogers, came up to him and demanded it. Unable to move, the old man said simply, "Take it." Rogers grabbed the weapon, turned it around, and shot the old man in the chest. He then pulled a harvesting knife from his saddle and hacked up McBride, who was still alive. Another militiaman, William Reynolds, entered the blacksmith shop where he discovered ten-year-old Sardius Smith and his little brother Alma hiding beneath the bellows, whimpering at the side of their dead father. Sardius begged for their lives, but Reynolds grinned at his associates, saying "Nits make lice," and blew the child's brains out, splattering his little brother. He then sent another ball into six-year-old Alma, destroying most of his hip."

What Katzpur failed to mention, again, is that at the Battle of Crooked River, where the LDS attacked, unprovoked, the Missouri State Militia, one of the Militia men was hurt or shot. As he lay there the Mormons attacked him slitting his face wide open and, I believe, stabbed him with their weapons and left him for dead. I guess the story is always better when your side is the constant victim. I have learned to always double check LDS stories. The truth is rarely what they say, if you ask me.
I will post how the LDS burned down homes/buildings in the middle of a harsh winter and then blamed it on the home owners. To that I say, Yeah, right.

 

[Sonny]

That's because you believe in it, but that opinion is not shared by billions of others. The Bible is a great book, imo, but it's not the only book.

You could do what I did, study a bunch of religious books and isolate the ones that 'could be' true. Then, further research them until you find the one that is the most believable. Or, not.

 

[Katzpur]

My account of the Haun's Mill Massacre is 100% accurate. It includes all pertinent information pertaining to the event, and makes no extraneous excuses for the perpetrators. As always, it's up to the members of RF to believe me or to believe Sonny. Objective, unbiased articles on early Mormon history are hard to find. Although Wikipedia is hardly the most scholarly source of information, it is probably as unbiased and objective a source as is available. Here are three articles from Wikipedia for the benefit of anyone who actually wants to get his facts straight:

1838 Mormon War
Haun's Mill Massacre
Extermination Order

Incidentally, in September, 1976 (138 years after it was made legal to murder any Mormon found living in Missouri), then Missouri Governor Christopher S. Bond officially rescinded the Extermination Order, saying, "This was a dark chapter in Missouri’s history. In this, our country’s 200th birthday, it is fitting to reaffirm our belief in the principles which our founding fathers recognized in our state and nation’s Constitution and Bill of Rights. “On behalf of all Missourians [I express] our deep regret for the injustice and undue suffering which was caused by this 1838 order... Governor Boggs’s order clearly contravened the rights to life, liberty, property, and religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the State of Missouri.”

Thank God for men like Christopher Bond.

As to Sonny's claim that the LDS Church has never apologized for the Mountain Meadows Massacre, that, too, is a lie. A monument honoring those who died in the massacre stands today near the spot where it look place, and when that monument was dedicated, the Church issued the following statement:

"What was done here long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct. We cannot change what happened, but we can remember and honor those who were killed here. We express profound regret for the massacre carried out in this valley... and for the undue and untold suffering experienced by the victims then and by their relatives to the present time. A separate expression of regret is owed the Paiute people who have unjustly borne for too long the principal blame for what occurred during the massacre. Although the extent of their involvement is disputed, it is believed they would not have participated without the direction and stimulus provided by local church leaders and members. The church has worked with descendant groups ... to maintain the monument and surrounding property and continues to improve and preserve these premises to make them attractive and accessible to all who visit. We are committed to do so in the future."

 

[Kirran]

I haven't seen it yet (but I will). You can bet that you only heard the pro-LDS side which, imo, is less than half truth but whole lies. I'll reply to it so you'll know the truth and where to find it.

By dint of being the 'pro-LDS' side you say it is whole lies, when you admit yourself you haven't read anything about it?

 

[McBell]

I haven't seen it yet (but I will). You can bet that you only heard the pro-LDS side which, imo, is less than half truth but whole lies. I'll reply to it so you'll know the truth and where to find it.

You have not even read it yet but are already sure it is nothing but complete lies?

Bias much?

Hoiw can anything else you say on the topic be taken seriously?

 

[LuisDantas]

I haven't seen it yet (but I will). You can bet that you only heard the pro-LDS side which, imo, is less than half truth but whole lies. I'll reply to it so you'll know the truth and where to find it.

Wait.

You have not even "seen it", yet you somehow know that Katzpur only heard one side, and you are already certain that said side is lying outright?

Are you sure that is what you mean to say?

 

[McBell]

Wait.

You have not even "seen it", yet you somehow know that Katzpur only heard one side, and you are already certain that said side is lying outright?

Are you sure that is what you mean to say?

With as many times as he has had his *** handed to him in this thread....

 

[David1967]

You have not even "seen it", yet you somehow know that Katzpur only heard one side, and you are already certain that said side is lying outright?

In my experience with Katzpur (all positive and friendly BTW), whether you agree with her on theology or not, she obviously does her homework on the issue, and always has an honest and thoughtful opinion on it.

 

[Katzpur]

In my experience with Katzpur (all positive and friendly BTW), whether you agree with her on theology or not, she obviously does her homework on the issue, and always has an honest and thoughtful opinion on it.

Thank you, David. That means a great deal to me.

 

[Katzpur]

What was you said Katzpur? I think it was this... "We do not believe that any of us will ever be equal to God, our Eternal Father in Heaven." Would you care to retract that comment? I think you should.

You think I should? Oh, that's rich. No, I would not care to retract that comment because it is an accurate statement of what we believe. But thank you for giving me the opportunity to reemphasize it:

"We do not believe that any of us will ever be equal to God, our Eternal Father in Heaven. He will always be our God and we will always worship Him."

 

[David1967]

I often write down my stray thoughts and save them. This one I felt was relative to this thread. Take it please in the spirit in which I intend it, and that is without offense toward anyone. I may have posted this before.

One persons heretic


"It is interesting how one persons Christian is another's heretic, or apostate. It seems that too often, people are so concerned with making a judgment on another's relationship with God that I fear they inadvertently fail to see where their own may be lacking. ( BTW, this is in no way a reference to anyone in particular, just a general observation of different denominational views toward others.) Often times ,as we see in the Bible concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus time, the ones confident in their own holiness were the most spiritually bankrupt. Does that mean that I cant judge for myself what belief is true or false? Absolutely not. But that is my personal view, and does not give me or anyone else the right or authority to pass judgment on another for their personal and sincere faith. For me to do so would be to elevate myself in the same way that the religious authorities of Jesus time did to him. God forbid that I ever do such a thing. My point being that if the Apostle Paul could concede that he saw everything "as through a dim mirror", then surely I can be as humble. God knows our hearts and our sincerity. God will judge us. And I think that a lot of that will be based on the commandment that Jesus gave to us that 'we love one another.' I believe that if we keep that in mind and also as scripture says, "regard others as better than ourselves", we will all treat one another in a kind and compassionate way that God would approve.........Just a thought."

 

[dianaiad]

No? Are you sure about that, Katzpur? Let me help you out a bit with what the KDS church leaders 'actually taught-
1. In the History of the Church (HoC), which is a 7-volume set of the history of the LDS Church and described by the LDS Church and its leaders as 'the most accurate history the world has ever known, JS taught,

"I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, NOR JESUS ever did it. I BOAST THAT NO MAN EVER DID SUCH A WORK AS I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet. (HoC 6:408/9).

Slightly out of context, there. Had you read this quote IN context, rather than from the anti-Mormon site you got it from, you would have a slightly different view of what was said here. Not that I expect you to believe ME in any way, but the History of the Church IS online and you can find it. It's in chapter 19, by the way, and the talk he gave begins by claiming that he was dealing with many persecutions (in fact, he was) and that whatever his enemies wanted, he would be the precise opposite; if they wanted a 'beardless boy" to be humble, HE would climb on a mountain and 'roar..." that his enemies, no matter how hard they try to 'spoke him under," would not win because God is in the 'still small voice,' and however, many persecutions Joseph himself received...in order to 'keep him humble,' he said, that he would beat them.

So what he did here was to take Jesus' words in John 14: 12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

Then he made the statement you quoted. Was it overblown and more than a bit over the top? Sure. However, it was a rhetorical device, common in speechmaking then AND now, and not something he went around claiming all the days of his life.

[[ It’s obvious to me that JS believed that he was superior to Jesus in every way. An interesting and vital piece of information is that JS himself made that statement more than a month before the other statement was made AND, of course, while he (JS) was still alive. The D&C statement was made after Joseph and Hyrum were dead and speaks on the event, after the fact, of the 27th of June, 1844. Here is that statement FYI...
This is from D&C 135 and it is dated “June 27, 1844” and starts out with these words,
"To seal the testimony of this book (D&C) and the BoM, we announce the Martyrdom of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and Hyrum Smith the Patriarch." (D&C 135:1)
"Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more (save Jesus only), for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it." (D&C 135:3) ]]

Yes, I imagine that it does seem obvious to you. However, what seems obvious to you is not as obvious to the Mormons who believe that he was a prophet, and obviously it wasn't obvious to the folks who wrote about him in the Doctrine and Covenants. Or doesn't that 'save Jesus only" reach your ears?

As it happens, since we believe that Joseph Smith WAS a prophet of God, and that God and His Son appeared to him and used him to restore what we think is original Christianity, then he certainly DID do more for the salvation of men in this world...SAVE JESUS ONLY...than any other man. If his claims regarding the revelations he received are true, then how could that claim NOT be true?

..........but you do seem to be forgetting that 'save Jesus only' part.

2. Joseph Smith taught this beauty,
"Would to God, brethren, I could tell you who I am! Would to God I could tell you what I know! But you would call it blasphemy, and there are men upon this stand who would want to take my life." (Joseph Smith quoted in "Life of Heber C. Kimball", 322)
[[Heber Kimball was one of the greatest of the great men in Mormonism. If he said something about Mormonism or the Mormon leaders you could bet your life it was said the exact way he quoted it. In fact, JS praised Heber as only one of two of the first 12 LDS apostles who had not “lifted their heel against me”. The other was BY. (HoC 5:412)]]

We do believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet who received direct revelation from God to do what God wanted doing.

Sonny, you are using a very circular argument here.

Your criticism of him is only valid if Joseph Smith was NOT a prophet. If he was, then he was indeed what you are criticizing him for claiming that he was. Why are you criticizing him for telling the truth?

What you can't do, logically, is to use what YOU say his claims were to prove that he was not what he claimed to be.

I mean, really, Sonny:

Is it logical to claim that if a man says he's an astronaut, this proves that he's NOT one? I think that if the man claiming to be one was John Glenn, you might have a problem with your logic.

Or, as Walt Whitman said, "if you done it, it ain't bragging."

3. Joseph Smith is a God and he decides who goes to heaven, not Jesus (Acts 4:12),
(Sonny- Please forgive my caps/bold. I don't have time to change it- have to leave now)

"JS holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the veil in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians (sarcasm never fully works, boys. Does show what LDS really think of Christians, though), who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethen and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were 'wasted away' (a term LDS used for killed, etc), SOMETHING THAT NO DOUBT WILL MORTIFY THEM-SOMETHING THAT, TO SAY THE LEAST, IS A MATTER OF DEEP REGRET TO THEM-

NAMELY, THAT NO MAN OR WOMAN IN THIS DISPENSATION WILL EVER ENETER INTO THE CELESTIAL KINGDOM OF GOD WITHOUT THE "CONSENT" OF JOSEPH SMITH."

"From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the 'winding-up scene'* of all things, EVERY MAN OR WOMAN "MUST" HAVE THE CERTIFICATE OF JOSEPH SMITH, JUNIOR, AS A "PASSPORT" TO THEIR "ENTRANCE WHERE GOD AND CHRIST ARE- I WITH YOU AND YOU WITH ME. I CANNOT GO THERE WITHOUT HIS "CONSENT".

"He holds the of that kingdom for the last dispensation-THE KEYS TO 'RULE' IN 'THE SPIRIT-WORLD'; ANF HE RULES THERE TRIUMPHANTLY, FOR HE 'GAINED FULL POWER' and a glorious victory over the power of satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world."

"HE REIGNS THERE AS SUPREME A BEING IN HIS SHERE, CAPACITY, AND CALLING, AS GOD DOES IN HEAVEN."

"Many will exclaim- "Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" BUT IT IS TRUE." (JoD 7:289)
And,
“You call us fools; but the day will be, gentlemen and ladies, whether you belong to this Church or not, when you will prize brother Joseph Smith as the Prophet of the Living God, AND LOOK UPON HIM AS A GOD. (JoD 5:88)
What was you said Katzpur? I think it was this... "We do not believe that any of us will ever be equal to God, our Eternal Father in Heaven." Would you care to retract that comment? I think you should.

the above is absolutely incorrect, presented in about as sarcastic and inaccurate a manner as I can imagine.

...............................................ah, well.

 

[Sonny]

The doctrines of the Church affirm that the Atonement wrought by the shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ,

To me this quote is really ('really' should be in caps, bold and underlined) deceptive. Mormonism teaches that when Jesus 'shed His blood' for the sins of the world it was in the garden when he was in agony, not on the Cross at Calvary. It seems Katzpur's nondisclosure of the true meaning of the LDS church's 'Jesus' shed blood' was an accident or a simple mistake on her part. But I felt the full truth of what the LDS mean when they say that should be known, just as an fyi.

However, if a person thereafter commits a grievous sin such as the shedding of innocent blood, the Savior's sacrifice alone will not absolve the person of the consequences of the sin. Only by voluntarily submitting to whatever penalty the Lord may require can that person benefit from the Atonement of Christ.

Right. But, not only are there some sins Jesus' blood won't cover in Mormon beliefs but they also teach that once a person sins and asks God to forgive them but then sin again 'all' of their previous sins come back on them. D&C (Doctrines and Covenants) 58:42 states,
"Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more."
But, D&C 82:7 states,
"And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God."
Then there is this,
"...and he (God) never doth vary from that which he hath said." (Mosiah 2:22- this verse is repeated throughout dozens of LDS books).
But, really?! So, which is it, the LDS god forgives and forgets our sins or (since God knows that mankind can't stop sinning, it's in our nature to sin) he waits till we sin again then...what...gets his magnifying glass out for us ants? Or, did he mean what he said in D&C 58 and not in D&C 82? Or, is D&C 82 right and D&C 58 not? I have some seriously troubling concerns about that god and I don't even acknowledge him. Katzpur, which of those 3 passages does he mean and which ones was he joking about? And, why?

Also, it seems (to me at least) that the LDS church speaks Christian-ese, a language that looks and sounds like Christianity's words but means something else entirely/ Like the comment above about Jesus' shed blood. It sounds/looks Christian so few ever ask more questions about that belief. But once one learns the real meanings it becomes obvious that what the LDS say, or, rather, 'mean', is not what Christianity means by the same statements/teachings. And, there are a lot of words and phrases the LDS use/mean differently than Christianity. This is why I say the Mormon church is not a Christian church. I bet most of you thot she meant Jesus' shed blood occurred 'on the Cross', huh?. Well, it doesn't mean that to LDS and that is why you'll never see a cross on any LDS property or in any LDS building.

 

[Sonny]

We believe, as you know, that ours is a restoration of the very Church Jesus Christ established during His ministry here on earth. It would follow, then, that we believe we are teaching the same doctrines as were taught then and accepted by Jesus’ followers. Throughout the New Testament, there are indications that this doctrine (known as deification or exaltation) is not one the Latter-day Saints invented, but that the earliest Christians understood and believed it, as well.

Where is the evidence that points to God's truth being lost or taken from the earth? The LDS never provide any when they make these blanket comments (beliefs/doctrines).
Plus, Jesus taught,
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will BY NO MEANS pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Mt. 5:18-that statement is repeated over and over in the Bible and by Jesus Himself. There is absolutely no reason or proof that God's inspired word was ever misplaced, lost, stolen, destroyed or taken off the earth by God or anyone else. Another proof the LDS church is not Christian. Here are some verses to back up Mt. 5:18. There is a lot of them but they will help to show what the Bible taught about the subject and others who teach differently than the Bible- Mt. 16:18, 24:35; Mk. 13:31-32; Lk. 16:17, 21:33 and, Mt. 7:15-23, 23:27-28, 24:23-30; Lk. 13:23-24; 2 Cor. 11:4, 13-15; Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 4:2-4, 1 Jn. 4:1; Rev. 2:2.

 

[Katzpur]

To me this quote is really ('really' should be in caps, bold and underlined) deceptive. Mormonism teaches that when Jesus 'shed His blood' for the sins of the world it was in the garden when he was in agony, not on the Cross at Calvary. It seems Katzpur's nondisclosure of the true meaning of the LDS church's 'Jesus' shed blood' was an accident or a simple mistake on her part. But I felt the full truth of what the LDS mean when they say that should be known, just as an fyi.

Mormons believe that Jesus Christ's atoning sacrifice began in Gethsemane and culminated on Calvary. I understand the implications of that. It suggests that we believe He suffered more intensely and for a longer period of time than you do. Sorry, but it is what it is.

Right. But, not only are there some sins Jesus' blood won't cover in Mormon beliefs but they also teach that once a person sins and asks God to forgive them but then sin again 'all' of their previous sins come back on them. D&C (Doctrines and Covenants) 58:42 states,
"Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more."
But, D&C 82:7 states,
"And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God."
Then there is this,
"...and he (God) never doth vary from that which he hath said." (Mosiah 2:22- this verse is repeated throughout dozens of LDS books).
But, really?! So, which is it, the LDS god forgives and forgets our sins or (since God knows that mankind can't stop sinning, it's in our nature to sin) he waits till we sin again then...what...gets his magnifying glass out for us ants? Or, did he mean what he said in D&C 58 and not in D&C 82? Or, is D&C 82 right and D&C 58 not? I have some seriously troubling concerns about that god and I don't even acknowledge him.

Well, if you don't acknowledge Him, Sonny, I suggest you stop worrying about it. It really isn't something you need to concern yourself with at all.

The wonderful thing about the gospel of Jesus Christ as it is taught in His restored Church is that through the gift of Christ's Atonement, we can not only improve, but actually will be rewarded for doing nothing more than trying. As Elder Jeffrey R. Holland put it: "The Lord blesses those who want to improve, who accept the need for commandments and try to keep them, who cherish Christlike virtues and strive to the best of their ability to acquire them. We are going to be blessed for our desire to do good, even as we actually strive to be so."

Repentance is a precious gift. We can completely mess up time and time again, and yet to God, it's like we've only messed up once. Here's why I say that: In the 58th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, we read that “he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more.” I've often wondered about the use of the word "remember" in that verse. What if the last half of that statement were missing, and the verse just said, "He who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven"? That's a pretty great promise, but His promise that He will remember them no more is even a greater one. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have my sins forgotten entirely than have them forgiven but still remembered. He knows we're imperfect but He will continue to forgive and forget as long as we sincerely keep trying.

There is one caveat to this promise, though, and it's explained in D&C 61:10-11, which says: "I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. And ye ought to say in your hearts—let God judge between me and thee, and reward thee according to thy deeds." This means that it is our responsibility to remember that God's promise to us is also given to every last one of His children. There are no exceptions. We do not have the right to condemn anyone, to look down on anyone, or to treat anyone in any way other than as we would want to be treated ourselves. I love what this means! It means that we should not only ask God to reward us according to our works, but to reward others according to their works. The focus is on what it should be on.

Finally, I'm going to quote Elder Holland once more: "Our Heavenly Father wants to bless us. A rewarding, abundant, and eternal life is the very object of His merciful plan for His children! It is a plan predicated on the truth 'that all things work together for good to them that love God.' If gospel standards seem high and the personal improvement needed in the days ahead seems out of reach, remember Joshua's encouragement to his people when they faced a daunting future. 'Sanctify yourselves, for tomorrow the Lord will do wonders among you.' The first great commandment of all eternity is to love God with all of our heart, might, mind, and strength—that's the first great commandment. But the first great truth of all eternity is that that God loves us with all of His heart, might, mind and strength."

Also, it seems (to me at least) that the LDS church speaks Christian-ese, a language that looks and sounds like Christianity's words but means something else entirely/ Like the comment above about Jesus' shed blood. It sounds/looks Christian so few ever ask more questions about that belief. But once one learns the real meanings it becomes obvious that what the LDS say, or, rather, 'mean', is not what Christianity means by the same statements/teachings. And, there are a lot of words and phrases the LDS use/mean differently than Christianity. This is why I say the Mormon church is not a Christian church. I bet most of you thot she meant Jesus' shed blood occurred 'on the Cross', huh?. Well, it doesn't mean that to LDS and that is why you'll never see a cross on any LDS property or in any LDS building.

Sonny, how things really are bears little resemblance to how they "seem" to you.

The reason you don't see crosses on LDS buildings is because our focus is on the glorified, resurrected Christ, the Christ who sits today on the right hand of His Father, not on the Christ hanging in agony while being mocked by His torturers. We believe that He would prefer than we emphasize, not the fact that He died, but that He overcame death. Besides, displaying the cross as a Christian icon was very rare during at least the first century after Jesus' death. It depicts a horrendous method of public execution and, consequently, His earliest followers almost never used it. I guess "real" Christianity didn't emerge until later on.

One final note: If it makes you feel more as if your words are getting through to people, by all means use all of the caps, boldface type and underlining you want. Maybe that's what your posts need, because obviously the context itself is pretty unconvincing.

 

[Katzpur]

Where is the evidence that points to God's truth being lost or taken from the earth? The LDS never provide any when they make these blanket comments (beliefs/doctrines).
Plus, Jesus taught,
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will BY NO MEANS pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Mt. 5:18-that statement is repeated over and over in the Bible and by Jesus Himself. There is absolutely no reason or proof that God's inspired word was ever misplaced, lost, stolen, destroyed or taken off the earth by God or anyone else. Another proof the LDS church is not Christian. Here are some verses to back up Mt. 5:18. There is a lot of them but they will help to show what the Bible taught about the subject and others who teach differently than the Bible- Mt. 16:18, 24:35; Mk. 13:31-32; Lk. 16:17, 21:33 and, Mt. 7:15-23, 23:27-28, 24:23-30; Lk. 13:23-24; 2 Cor. 11:4, 13-15; Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 4:2-4, 1 Jn. 4:1; Rev. 2:2.

OMG! Which of the 30,000+ different Christian denominations in the world today does that truth reside with? No two of them teach exactly the same things, so they can't all be 100% correct. There's more evidence for an apostasy in the early Church than I could copy and paste for you in 100 posts. You say we never provide any evidence for our claim, and yet there are books full of evidence.

 

[McBell]

Where is the evidence that points to God's truth being lost or taken from the earth? The LDS never provide any when they make these blanket comments (beliefs/doctrines).
Plus, Jesus taught,
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will BY NO MEANS pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Mt. 5:18-that statement is repeated over and over in the Bible and by Jesus Himself. There is absolutely no reason or proof that God's inspired word was ever misplaced, lost, stolen, destroyed or taken off the earth by God or anyone else. Another proof the LDS church is not Christian. Here are some verses to back up Mt. 5:18. There is a lot of them but they will help to show what the Bible taught about the subject and others who teach differently than the Bible- Mt. 16:18, 24:35; Mk. 13:31-32; Lk. 16:17, 21:33 and, Mt. 7:15-23, 23:27-28, 24:23-30; Lk. 13:23-24; 2 Cor. 11:4, 13-15; Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 4:2-4, 1 Jn. 4:1; Rev. 2:2.

Still waiting for you to show that YOUR interpretation of the Bible is the one true way for Christians.

Because, you know, until you can do that all you are doing is showing how Mormon belief differs from your belief.

That you claim the Mormons are wrong in their beliefs merely reveals your arrogance.

 

[Luciferi Baphomet]

My sole purpose in starting this Thread is to openly, honestly and in a civil manner discuss whether the LDS church fits the criteria of a Christian church. All of us have our own personal opinions about many issues, including religion and politics. But, how many of us know what the facts say?
My hope is we can discuss our opinions, the evidence, speculation and myths and learn as we have a civil, rational and reasonable debate. After all, isn't this why we have a Religious Debate Forum? To share what we think, feel, believe and know about Religion.
I would also like to add, if you have info that may be useful or applicable please post it so we all can enjoy or learn it (references and quotes are always helpful and encouraged).
Thanks! And, tell us all what you think.

Yes mormonism is christian. The mormons here in Utah try to control everything.

 

[dianaiad]

To me this quote is really ('really' should be in caps, bold and underlined) deceptive. Mormonism teaches that when Jesus 'shed His blood' for the sins of the world it was in the garden when he was in agony, not on the Cross at Calvary. It seems Katzpur's nondisclosure of the true meaning of the LDS church's 'Jesus' shed blood' was an accident or a simple mistake on her part. But I felt the full truth of what the LDS mean when they say that should be known, just as an fyi.

Just as an fyi....

If one wants to know what the members of any religion mean when they say something, it's best to ask the members of that religion.

I, personally, don't think that you would get a real vision of Judaism by reading 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion," nor would you get an accurate portrayal of Catholicism by reading Jack Chick. I rather doubt that getting your information about Christianity in general from a Muslim Madrasah would be an unbiased source, and I rather doubt that Walter Martin is a good source for Catholic teachings OR Mormon ones.

In that sense, too, I rather recommend against accepting Sonny's view of Mormonism as being objective or unbiased. Or correct.

Because they aren't.

Just fyi.

 

[dianaiad]

Yes mormonism is christian. The mormons here in Utah try to control everything.

Well, do you blame them?

I mean, really, m'friend; there is a REASON that Mormons ended up in Utah, and it wasn't because they were allowed to live their religion anywhere ELSE.

As well, there ARE still more Mormons than 'regular folk' in Utah. It's still a republic/democracy. If you don't want 'em controlling everything, go get out the vote. Amazing how that works. You might even get some of 'em to go back to being Democrats, though I rather doubt it.

(and, just as an aside....up until Clinton, Utahns WERE as likely to be Democrat as Republican, and previous to that, they were more likely to be Democrat than Republican; Clinton did the most amazing land grab there, and really made Utah unhappy. It'll be awhile before the Democrats are forgiven for that one).

As for me?

I live in California and don't have to worry about it.