You're no Christian

[Sonny]

It is a good thing you know the truth.

Really? Oh, man. Did you just jump in this Thread? I have explained that nearly ad nauseum. The truth is set firmly in the 'measuring line' we call the Bible, when it comes to what is and isn't Christianity. I know nothing except what I have studied or heard/read from those I trust (but I still double-check them- I don't take, at face value, any person's word on what is truth or Christian).

 

[allfoak]

Really? Oh, man. Did you just jump in this Thread? I have explained that nearly ad nauseum. The truth is set firmly in the 'measuring line' we call the Bible, when it comes to what is and isn't Christianity. I know nothing except what I have studied or heard/read from those I trust (but I still double-check them- I don't take, at face value, any person's word on what is truth or Christian).

Isn't double checking just looking at another man's opinion?

 

[savagewind]

Please quote from God-the-Father in support of one's point of view.
Regards

I think I did. It is written that all are alive to God The Father. From Adam until now is one generation.

 

[metis]

My theology comes from the Bible. Show us where the Bible teaches humans can forgive sin.

I did in post #349, plus you keep missing the point about the nature of sin and forgiveness that are on different levels, which is why I have to give up continuing on with this discussion.

 

[Katzpur]

Mormons do not believe in the Trinity, although some of the books written by its leaders use the word. The Mormon church teaches that those three- Father, Son and Holy Spirit are 3 separate and distinct Gods, thus violating the Bible's teachings of one God (Is. 43:10). And, the LDS church goes on to teach there are quite possibly Trillions of Gods (every man can become a God). Brigham Young (BY) taught, "There never was a time when there weren't God". I have it referenced in 'The Discourses of BY', the 'Journal of Discourses' and a couple of other books. Now, BY taught ALL of his sermons, which that was, are Scripture. He also taught, speaking of Joseph Smith's (JS) teaching that 'men live on the , dress like Quakers, and live, generally, to the age of 1,000', that men live on the sun. I'm not making this stuff up. These are reasons why Katspur doesn't want to have an honest, open and civil discussion about the LDS doctrines.

The LDS have never quite explained how the Holy Spirit, who, like all Gods before him started out as spirit beings in Heaven (literal 'children' of God and one of his myriads of wives) then became human and then progressed to be a God- or, at least I have never read it if they have. Maybe Katspur can help us with that info.

It’s a lot easier to forgive stupidity than hatefulness. For that reason, I’m going to go out on a limb and give you the benefit of the doubt. As hard as it is for me to wrap my head around it, you may actually be convinced that the LDS Church actually teaches this nonsense that you’re posting about us. For that reason, I pray that God, too, will forgive you for repeatedly breaking His commandment that you not bear false witness against your fellow man.

The vast majority of the “facts” you have presented are nothing more than half-truths, embellishments to and distortions of the truth, and pitiful attempts to paraphrase out-of-context statements taken from non-canonical records dating from as far back as the early- and mid-1800s.

In the very first post you directed to me, you said, “Don’t get mad at my knowledge of the Mormon Church and your lack of it… and run off when you don't like your church's truth.” And then you invited me to talk. When someone who doesn’t know the first thing about me starts out by insulting me and trying to bully me into a debate, they are not likely to get me to accept. I don’t need you to tell me what my Church teaches, Sonny. I’ve been a member all my life, and at my age, I’ve been around the block with people like you more times than I can count. I know my religion backwards and forwards, outside in and inside out.

A couple of the claims you have made are actually correct. I would acknowledge them in a heartbeat, although I would also explain them in such a way that anyone who wants to understand the scriptural support behind them would be able to. In the vast majority of your claims, you have twisted and embellished the truth so as to make Mormon doctrine either laughable or repugnant. In a few instances, you have told some outright lies. And yet you continue to call for “an honest, open, and civil discussion” with me. Really?

I’ve been a member of RF for nearly 12 years and have over 27,000 posts to my credit. If you think I am inclined to run away from a debate on Mormonism, you are sadly mistaken. What you don’t seem to understand is that not every comment made by any prominent LDS leader at any time, regardless of the circumstances or audience constitutes LDS doctrine. Would it surprise you to learn that there is not one of your “facts” about Mormonism that I haven’t heard literally dozens of times in my life? You said you could show me things “that would astound [me].” Uh… no, you couldn’t. The thing is, as many times as I’ve heard people like you tell me “what Mormons really believe,” never once in 68 years have I heard these things taught in an LDS worship service or classroom setting. Considering the fact that practicing Mormons attend church for three hours every Sunday, don’t you think a few of these “Mormon doctrines” would have come up at least once or twice – if, in fact, they were actually Mormon doctrines? If these things were really what Mormons were supposed to believe, then every effort would be made to teach us these things from the time we were children.

If you have any desire at all to get your facts straight, I would suggest that you begin by reading “Approaching Mormon Doctrine.” This article is found on an official Church website, “Newsroom” and, according to the Church’s highest leadership, it is “the official resource for news media, opinion leaders and the public.” One statement in particular from that article should be of some importance to you:

“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.”

Please note that neither “The Discourses of Brigham Young” nor “The Journal of Discourses” are considered canonical by the Church. Neither are a myriad of other miscellaneous books written by various LDS leaders over the past nearly two centuries that you might eventually get around to referring to.

In your last post, you dish out more of the same nonsense you’ve been dishing out since the day a week or so ago that you joined RF, and then conclude by saying: “I’m not making this stuff up. These are reasons Katspur (sic) doesn’t want to have an honest, open and civil discussion about the LDS doctrines.” You’re wrong about that. I have honest, open and civil discussions about LDS doctrines all the time, and would be happy to do so again at any time -- but only with people who have proven themselves capable of doing so. I simply do not believe that you are, and I categorically refuse to stoop to your level – if that were even possible – in order to have a dialogue with you.

 

[Katzpur]

Early in the history of the LDS church they started a school, The School of the Prophets. In that school they taught what is called 'The Lectures on Faith' (L/F). In the 'Lectures', which was in every Doctrines and Covenants (D&C) from the first in 1835 until 1920. It was removed without comment bc it, now, contradicted many of the LDS's newer (changed) doctrines/teachings. You read what Katspur said (above) but this is what the LDS church taught in the Lectures.
Lectures 5:2 (p.54)-
"There are TWO (not three- the Holy Spirit was not considered by Mormons to be a God in the early days- parenthesis my add) personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing, and supreme power over all things - by whom all things were created and made that are created and made, whether visible or invisible; whether in heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of space."

[I was fortunate to obtain a 1919 D&C Commentary (no longer in print but referred to often by LDS- why refer if not published? No one can cross-reference bc they don't have one. They don't want members knowing what it teaches) and a 1918 D&C. Thanks to others assisting me in my/our studies]

Later, the LDS church taught (changed doctrine to teach) there are 'more 'Gods.
Orson Pratt (one of the LDS first 12 apostles chosen in 1835- still alive according to LDS church) said, "If we should take a million worlds like this and number their PARTICLES, we should find that THERE ARE MORE GODS THAN THERE ARE PARTICLES OF MATTER IN THOSE WORLDS." JoD. 2:345*

BY said, "How many Gods there are, I do not know. BUT THERE NEVER WAS A TIME WHEN THERE WERE NOT GODS" JoD 7:333, DBY (before BY said this he had been speaking/teaching about Adam being God).

Many other LDS prophets and apostles have said the same. Such as JS, Heber C. Kimball, Milton R. Hunter, BRM, Joseph Fielding Smith, LeGrand Richards, etc.
The LDS church would, eventually, settle on the statement katspur quoted. But getting there was quite the documented experience. Their beliefs went from 1 God to 2 then 3 then more God than there are particles of matter. But, as is the case with the LDS, they have contradicting doctrines for God. For ex. they teach that God is a self-existing being (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith [TPJS] to God was a dad (to Jesus) and had a dad who had a dad who had a dad, ad infinitum, to 'more Gods than there are particles of matter. But, they stop teaching most of that around 1915-1917 and then finely tuned their belief system. I'm not making these things up. I'm only posting what they taught in their sermons which were turned into books, such as the JoDs. They also teach that everyone will some day look upon JS as a GOD.

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)
and,
"He (JS) reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven." (JoD 7:289)


I'm sorry, katspur, that's not quite right. This is what your church said about Christianity/Christians. It makes me wonder why they want to be called Christians today- there was a time when they taught they had nothing to do with any other known religion- that, too, was documented by the LDS church.
In volume 7 of the History of the Church, which is the Index volume, it says this on page 63, under the heading of "Christianity",

"devil is hope of salvation of, V5:218"

In Hoc 5:218, it says this (last paragraph on pg.218),

"What is it that INSPIRES professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It IS that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world."
And the LDS leaders taught this,
(My add- Sorry for CAPS but that is how I have it, for emphasis, in my files. And, I have a lot to do today so no time to change it)
"CHRISTIANS-THOSE POOR, MISERABLE PRIESTS brother Brigham was speaking about- some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on earth, and at the same time preaching righteousness to the children of men. THE POOR DEVILS, THEY COULD NOT GET UP HERE AND PREACH AN ORAL DISCOURSE, TO SAVE THEMSELVES FROM HELL;" (JoD 5:89, 90).
Mormons were very proud to not be Christians back then. I wonder why they try so hard to convince folks they are Christians today?


*JoD- The Journal of Discourses are just that, discourses, sermons, that the LDS leaders taught to the LDS people. In the Preface page of Vol.8 (of 27) it states,
"The JODs (but full name) DESERVEDLY ranks as one of the standard works of the Church."

Please see Post #405.

 

[Sonny]

It’s a lot easier to forgive stupidity than hatefulness. For that reason, I’m going to go out on a limb and give you the benefit of the doubt. As hard as it is for me to wrap my head around it, you may actually be convinced that the LDS Church actually teaches this nonsense that you’re posting about us. For that reason, I pray that God, too, will forgive you for repeatedly breaking His commandment that you not bear false witness against your fellow man.

First, I'm not stupid (in relation to Mormon Doctrine) and speaking the truth is not hate. Don't you think your church has beat that dead horse enough already? I do. Especially when your church trashed Christianity/Christians and the Bible for generations- see my last reply to your post.

The vast majority of the “facts” you have presented are nothing more than half-truths, embellishments to and distortions of the truth, and pitiful attempts to paraphrase out-of-context statements taken from non-canonical records dating from as far back as the early- and mid-1800s.

Katspur, that is why I 'asked' you to have an honest debate. You can, then, point out the errors. I will graciously admit my mistake, apologize and never say those things again. Isn't that a fair way to settle these issues? I think it is. But, if your church said it from the pulpit it is doctrine. That is how this works. None of us can say something then say I was joking or we didn't mean it or the church's 'Chosen' and 'Called' (by God) leaders got confused and said the wrong thing. JS, By and others said they spoke what God told them to speak. This is where I said early on that these groups then make excuses or justifications for what they once taught as God's word to mankind. But, I am willing to discuss them and see where it leads. Ok?

In the very first post you directed to me, you said, “Don’t get mad at my knowledge of the Mormon Church and your lack of it… and run off when you don't like your church's truth.” And then you invited me to talk. When someone who doesn’t know the first thing about me starts out by insulting me and trying to bully me into a debate, they are not likely to get me to accept. I don’t need you to tell me what my Church teaches, Sonny. I’ve been a member all my life, and at my age, I’ve been around the block with people like you more times than I can count. I know my religion backwards and forwards, outside in and inside out.

I'm sorry but I don't remember ever saying that to you. If I did I only meant it as I've studied your church with other good men for over 30 years and I do know what I am saying. Plus, I'm willing to post the LDS book it was published in.
I have never intentionally insulted any person. I'm glad you know your church 'forward and backwards'. It will make a good back and forth discussion.

In the vast majority of your claims, you have twisted and embellished the truth so as to make Mormon doctrine either laughable or repugnant. In a few instances, you have told some outright lies. And yet you continue to call for “an honest, open, and civil discussion” with me. Really?

Ok, Show me my errors then, please. Show my lies. Please. Hey, if have the evidence to back up the words then a discussion about them is the only way to correct me. And, Yes, really.

I’ve been a member of RF for nearly 12 years and have over 27,000 posts to my credit. If you think I am inclined to run away from a debate on Mormonism, you are sadly mistaken.

That is all I have asked for, an open and honest and civil discussion.

What you don’t seem to understand is that not every comment made by any prominent LDS leader at any time, regardless of the circumstances or audience constitutes LDS doctrine. Would it surprise you to learn that there is not one of your “facts” about Mormonism that I haven’t heard several hundred times in my life? You said you could show me things “that would astound [me].” Uh… no, you couldn’t. The thing is, as many times as I’ve heard people like you tell me “what Mormons really believe,” never once in 68 years have I heard these things taught in an LDS worship service or classroom setting. Considering the fact that practicing Mormons attend church for three hours every Sunday, don’t you think a few of these “Mormon doctrines” would have come up at least once or twice – if, in fact, they were actually Mormon doctrines? If these things were really what Mormons were supposed to believe, then every effort would be made to teach these things to Mormons from the time they were children.

Are you saying the LDS god chose men to serve him who can't get his words to his people right? Sounds like it, if they have to, decades later, mind you, come up with an excuse for saying them way back then. One would think that since the LDS god has said he would NOT allow/permit his leaders to lead his church astray that he (LDS god) would have fixed the mistakes and said that back then. Especially, since the LDS god said,
"The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer (allow) you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother's arms, as to any danger OF YOUR LEADERS leading you astray, for if THEY should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them off the earth." (JoD 9:289- also, see the 1st paragraph in the section titled 'Excerpts from three addresses by President WW regarding the Manifesto' found in D&C between the 1st and 2nd Official Declaration, although that one doesn't say anything about killing the leaders as the JOD does- but it implies it). So, was any of your LEADERS swept off the earth for teaching things not sanctioned by God? Not a single one, to my knowledge. Therefore, the LDS god must have agreed with what they said (or, he would have "quickly swept them off the earth", right?)

I'll reply to the rest of your post later when I have more time and to keep this one short.

 

[Sonny]

Please see Post #405.

Please, see Post #406

 

[Katzpur]

First, I'm not stupid (in relation to Mormon Doctrine) and speaking the truth is not hate. Don't you think your church has beat that dead horse enough already? I do. Especially when your church trashed Christianity/Christians and the Bible for generations- see my last reply to your post.


Katspur, that is why I 'asked' you to have an honest debate. You can, then, point out the errors. I will graciously admit my mistake, apologize and never say those things again. Isn't that a fair way to settle these issues? I think it is. But, if your church said it from the pulpit it is doctrine. That is how this works. None of us can say something then say I was joking or we didn't mean it or the church's 'Chosen' and 'Called' (by God) leaders got confused and said the wrong thing. JS, By and others said they spoke what God told them to speak. This is where I said early on that these groups then make excuses or justifications for what they once taught as God's word to mankind. But, I am willing to discuss them and see where it leads. Ok?


I'm sorry but I don't remember ever saying that to you. If I did I only meant it as I've studied your church with other good men for over 30 years and I do know what I am saying. Plus, I'm willing to post the LDS book it was published in.
I have never intentionally insulted any person. I'm glad you know your church 'forward and backwards'. It will make a good back and forth discussion.


Ok, Show me my errors then, please. Show my lies. Please. Hey, if have the evidence to back up the words then a discussion about them is the only way to correct me. And, Yes, really.


That is all I have asked for, an open and honest and civil discussion.

Are you saying the LDS god chose men to serve him who can't get his words to his people right? Sounds like it, if they have to, decades later, mind you, come up with an excuse for saying them way back then. One would think that since the LDS god has said he would NOT allow/permit his leaders to lead his church astray that he (LDS god) would have fixed the mistakes and said that back then. Especially, since the LDS god said,
"The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer (allow) you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother's arms, as to any danger OF YOUR LEADERS leading you astray, for if THEY should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them off the earth." (JoD 9:289- also, see the 1st paragraph in the section titled 'Excerpts from three addresses by President WW regarding the Manifesto' found in D&C between the 1st and 2nd Official Declaration, although that one doesn't say anything about killing the leaders as the JOD does- but it implies it). So, was any of your LEADERS swept off the earth for teaching things not sanctioned by God? Not a single one, to my knowledge. Therefore, the LDS god must have agreed with what they said (or, he would have "quickly swept them off the earth", right?)

I'll reply to the rest of your post later when I have more time and to keep this one short.

Please see Post #405.

 

[Sonny]

I did in post #349, plus you keep missing the point about the nature of sin and forgiveness that are on different levels, which is why I have to give up continuing on with this discussion.

Not to beat a dead but, again, this is what happens every time someone can't refute what others say or defend what they say, they either get mad and leave or resort to tactics like name-calling and worse. All I asked was a simple request, 'Where does it say that in the Bible?' and now it ends. Ok, I'm good with that.

 

[McBell]

In another thread a poster said in effect that some professed Christian churches aren't truly Christian because they do or don't do this, that, and the other thing.

My question: What churches, or denominations do you feel do not deserve to call themselves Christian, and why?


.

All of them.
Christianity is about the individual.
Not the groups, clubs, organizations, etc. that claim otherwise

 

[David T]

Apparently, you are unable or incapable of refuting what I've said (I noticed you nor any other non-believer/atheist never replied to the fulfilled prophecies I offered. Kind of hard to refute clear evidence (facts), huh?) So, rather than learn the truth people tend to retort negatively- just like you did. Unfortunately, you exposed your 'soft underbelly' with that ridiculous remark.

See, folks, this is precisely why the truth/facts/evidence is so important in discussions of important issues (religion, politics). Otherwise, people get bent out of shape and say moronic things like David T. He knows nothing about me. BC he doesn't like what I say but can't defend his beliefs nor refute what I say about some 'churches' beliefs he gets all red faced and rants incoherently about that which he knows nothing of, my beliefs/views..

You wish to exist in la la land that's how it is. You only understand ehats ptattlung in your brain which isn't much. It would like arguing crop circles with an "alien created the crop circle s believer: even if I was the one who created them. We see what we wish to see clearly you love nonsense.

 

[Sonny]

I’ve been a member of RF for nearly 12 years and have over 27,000 posts to my credit. If you think I am inclined to run away from a debate on Mormonism, you are sadly mistaken. What you don’t seem to understand is that not every comment made by any prominent LDS leader at any time, regardless of the circumstances or audience constitutes LDS doctrine. Would it surprise you to learn that there is not one of your “facts” about Mormonism that I haven’t heard several hundred times in my life? You said you could show me things “that would astound [me].” Uh… no, you couldn’t. The thing is, as many times as I’ve heard people like you tell me “what Mormons really believe,” never once in 68 years have I heard these things taught in an LDS worship service or classroom setting. Considering the fact that practicing Mormons attend church for three hours every Sunday, don’t you think a few of these “Mormon doctrines” would have come up at least once or twice – if, in fact, they were actually Mormon doctrines? If these things were really what Mormons were supposed to believe, then every effort would be made to teach these things to Mormons from the time they were children.

All I asked was 'a debate'. I'm not trying to do anything to anyone- I don't want folks to run, get mad, feel offended or try to get me kicked out of here. My intentions is to always have a fun debate. And here we are.
Well, as I posted, if they taught it was and it wasn't they'd be dead shortly thereafter if they didn't catch and stop it and correct the teaching, so said the LDs god. Comments that come generations after are excuses designed to justify present beliefs. If Christians did that we'd be haunted by the antis forever. None of us can have it both ways. It would be nice sometimes, tho
Would not surprise me at all. Even if half were from former LDS.
No, the church doesn't teach old doctrines today. That ended when the church revamped itself around 1915-1918. They dropped those 'God-given' beliefs and settle on, mostly, present ones- the world had encroached on them and knew of their teachings and beliefs so they 'changed' them. Would it concern you to learn that polygamy is the doctrine the LDS church was founded on? Elder John Taylor was preaching to the people in the Tabernacle in SLC, Ut. on April 7, 1866. He started out by saying (I mentioned it earlier- now you know 'where' it is taught, the reference) how good it is to know 'the' truth (Mormonism) and how bad it is if they do not live by their beliefs. And he teaches this,

(JoD 11:217), "We are situated differently from any other people under the face of the heavens. There is no people, no government, no kingdom, no assembly of people, civil, religious, political, or otherwise, that enjoy the blessings that we are in possession of this day;" (JoD 11:217)

And,

“As it regards our religious status, we feel just the same in relation to that (do our duty, obey our leaders, and maintain our integrity before God- p.217), for everything is connected with our religion and our God. We are not indebted to any church in existence for the position which we occupy, nor for the intelligence we are in possession of. We have no need to trace our authority through the Popes, or through any other medium, we care nothing about them. We do not need either to go to Rome or to the Greek Church to find out whether we are right or wrong, where our religion commenced, and whether we are placed on the right or on the wrong foundation.

We are not under the necessity of searching the Jewish records, or any other records, in relation to these matters. We are not indebted to any of the schools, academies, or systems of divinity, or theology, or any of the religious systems extant, nor to any of the heathen nations. There is no nation, people, kingdom, government; NO RELIGIOUS OR POLITICAL AUTHORITY OF ANY KIND THAT IS OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, THAT WE HAVE TO GO TO IN RELATION TO THIS MATTER.

WE DISCLAIM THE WHOLE OF THEM; CLAIM NO AFFINITY TO ANY OF THEM; ARE NOT OF THEM OR FROM THEM; AND, CONSEQUENTLY, SO FAR AS THEY ARE CONCERNED, WE ARE PERFECTLY INDEPENDENT OF THEM. OUR RELIGION CAME GOD; IT IS A REVELATION FROM THE MOST HIGH; it is that everlasting Gospel which John saw an angel bring to be preached in all the earth, and to every people, nation, kindred, and tongue, crying with a loud voice, fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come.

Then God is the author of our religion; He has REVEALED IT FROM THE HEAVENS; he has sent His holy angels for that purpose, who communicated it to Joseph Smith and others. Having restored the everlasting Gospel, He has sent it forth to all the world, and those men who have delivered that Gospel to us have received it by revelation directly from God, and have been ordained by that authority. If God had not spoken, if the heavens have not been opened, if the angels of God have not appeared then we have no religion- it is all a farce; for as I have said before WE CLAIM NO KINDRED, NO AFFINITY, OR RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM-GOD FORBID THAT WE SHOULD, WE DO NOT WANT IT. This, then, is the platform we stand; this is the position that we occupy before God; for this is God’s work that we are engaged in.” (JoD 11:218).

“We are not associated with them; our interest is not bound up with them; they have nothing which we can sustain. … Is there a religious society under the heavens that we are indebted to for any ideas or intelligence which we possess? NOT ONE. Is there any priest in Christiandom that has helped us forward in the least in our religious career? Not one.” (JoD 11:219).

This is pretty clear-cut. The early Mormon leaders taught that they were not, are not and don't want to be considered by anyone, anywhere to be Christian or any other religion. I am only repeating what they taught, printed and published so don't beat up on me, ok?

In my next post I will explain how polygamy is the foundation the Mormon church is based and built on. I will quote, without comment, exactly what the LDS leaders taught and where it can be found in Mormonism's vast printed material.

 

[Katzpur]

All I asked was 'a debate'. I'm not trying to do anything to anyone- I don't want folks to run, get mad, feel offended or try to get me kicked out of here. My intentions is to always have a fun debate. And here we are.
Well, as I posted, if they taught it was and it wasn't they'd be dead shortly thereafter if they didn't catch and stop it and correct the teaching, so said the LDs god. Comments that come generations after are excuses designed to justify present beliefs. If Christians did that we'd be haunted by the antis forever. None of us can have it both ways. It would be nice sometimes, tho
Would not surprise me at all. Even if half were from former LDS.
No, the church doesn't teach old doctrines today. That ended when the church revamped itself around 1915-1918. They dropped those 'God-given' beliefs and settle on, mostly, present ones- the world had encroached on them and knew of their teachings and beliefs so they 'changed' them. Would it concern you to learn that polygamy is the doctrine the LDS church was founded on? Elder John Taylor was preaching to the people in the Tabernacle in SLC, Ut. on April 7, 1866. He started out by saying (I mentioned it earlier- now you know 'where' it is taught, the reference) how good it is to know 'the' truth (Mormonism) and how bad it is if they do not live by their beliefs. And he teaches this,

(JoD 11:217), "We are situated differently from any other people under the face of the heavens. There is no people, no government, no kingdom, no assembly of people, civil, religious, political, or otherwise, that enjoy the blessings that we are in possession of this day;" (JoD 11:217)

And,

“As it regards our religious status, we feel just the same in relation to that (do our duty, obey our leaders, and maintain our integrity before God- p.217), for everything is connected with our religion and our God. We are not indebted to any church in existence for the position which we occupy, nor for the intelligence we are in possession of. We have no need to trace our authority through the Popes, or through any other medium, we care nothing about them. We do not need either to go to Rome or to the Greek Church to find out whether we are right or wrong, where our religion commenced, and whether we are placed on the right or on the wrong foundation.

We are not under the necessity of searching the Jewish records, or any other records, in relation to these matters. We are not indebted to any of the schools, academies, or systems of divinity, or theology, or any of the religious systems extant, nor to any of the heathen nations. There is no nation, people, kingdom, government; NO RELIGIOUS OR POLITICAL AUTHORITY OF ANY KIND THAT IS OF AN EARTHLY NATURE, THAT WE HAVE TO GO TO IN RELATION TO THIS MATTER.

WE DISCLAIM THE WHOLE OF THEM; CLAIM NO AFFINITY TO ANY OF THEM; ARE NOT OF THEM OR FROM THEM; AND, CONSEQUENTLY, SO FAR AS THEY ARE CONCERNED, WE ARE PERFECTLY INDEPENDENT OF THEM. OUR RELIGION CAME GOD; IT IS A REVELATION FROM THE MOST HIGH; it is that everlasting Gospel which John saw an angel bring to be preached in all the earth, and to every people, nation, kindred, and tongue, crying with a loud voice, fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come.

Then God is the author of our religion; He has REVEALED IT FROM THE HEAVENS; he has sent His holy angels for that purpose, who communicated it to Joseph Smith and others. Having restored the everlasting Gospel, He has sent it forth to all the world, and those men who have delivered that Gospel to us have received it by revelation directly from God, and have been ordained by that authority. If God had not spoken, if the heavens have not been opened, if the angels of God have not appeared then we have no religion- it is all a farce; for as I have said before WE CLAIM NO KINDRED, NO AFFINITY, OR RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM-GOD FORBID THAT WE SHOULD, WE DO NOT WANT IT. This, then, is the platform we stand; this is the position that we occupy before God; for this is God’s work that we are engaged in.” (JoD 11:218).

“We are not associated with them; our interest is not bound up with them; they have nothing which we can sustain. … Is there a religious society under the heavens that we are indebted to for any ideas or intelligence which we possess? NOT ONE. Is there any priest in Christiandom that has helped us forward in the least in our religious career? Not one.” (JoD 11:219).

This is pretty clear-cut. The early Mormon leaders taught that they were not, are not and don't want to be considered by anyone, anywhere to be Christian or any other religion. I am only repeating what they taught, printed and published so don't beat up on me, ok?

In my next post I will explain how polygamy is the foundation the Mormon church is based and built on. I will quote, without comment, exactly what the LDS leaders taught and where it can be found in Mormonism's vast printed material.

Please see Post #405.

 

[metis]

Please see Post #405.

Let me know how that works out for ya, OK?

 

[savagewind]

I think that if any organization that claims to be for The Almighty God and which declares anything at all, but then discovers it isn't the true view but who does not do anything within the law and everything to remedy the problem is accountable for any misunderstandings the false declaration did actually cause and if anyone sticks to the false idea, the one who said it in the Name of the Lord should be made responsible for any misunderstandings.

 

[Katzpur]

Let me know how that works out for ya, OK?

Will do. I've pretty much exhausted all other options. Some people are just slow learners.

 

[Scott C.]

He [Brigham Young] also taught, speaking of Joseph Smith's (JS) teaching that 'men live on the , dress like Quakers, and live, generally, to the age of 1,000', that men live on the sun.

I can't validate this statement from Brigham Young or Joseph Smith. But I can say with complete certainty that it is not Mormon doctrine that men live on the moon dressed like Quakers or that men live on the sun. It's not a church doctrine or a church teaching. I don't think there are any Mormons who believe it. I've never been taught this. Around 1976, when I was in High School. I was leaving church and found that someone had put flyers on the car windows in the parking lot. There was a quote from Joseph Smith that "men live on the moon" or something like that. Apparently someone not of my faith felt it worth his time to put flyers on the cars so we would all learn that Mormons believe men live on the moon. We had a little chuckle and moved on. Funny thing, since that date I have yet to hear it ever taught in church that men live on the moon. Now it's 2017 and apparently some people still think they have some great nugget of history to bring down the Mormon faith. Nothing new here.

 

[Katzpur]

I think that if any organization that claims to be for The Almighty God and which declares anything at all, but then discovers it isn't the true view but who does not do anything within the law and everything to remedy the problem is accountable for any misunderstandings the false declaration did actually cause and if anyone sticks to the false idea, the one who said it in the Name of the Lord should be made responsible for any misunderstandings.

Often times, people don't say things "in the Name of the Lord" but simply state their own opinions, opinions to which they are entitled, but are in no way binding on the members of that organization. I agree that if "any organization that claims to be for the Almighty God" makes any official statement of doctrine and later changes its stance, it is only right that it should clarify why the change is being made. I do not think that any organization should be responsible for the non-official, non-authoritative statements of opinion anyone in the organization should happen to make, particularly when it has made it so easy for people to get accurate information and know that this information is officially sanctioned and recognized "in the Name of the Lord." I further believe that every religion has the right to define its own doctrines and not have them defined by outsiders.

 

[savagewind]

Often times, people don't say things "in the Name of the Lord" but simply state their own opinions, opinions to which they are entitled, but are in no way binding on the members of that organization. I agree that if "any organization that claims to be for the Almighty God" makes any official statement of doctrine and later changes its stance, it is only right that it should clarify why the change is being made.

I think that opinion by any church leader should be called an opinion by the one who is pronouncing it. "This is my opinion....blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

I do not think that any organization should be responsible for the non-official, non-authoritative statements of opinion anyone in the organization should happen to make, particularly when it has made it so easy for people to get accurate information and know that this information is officially sanctioned and recognized "in the Name of the Lord."

me too.

I further believe that every religion has the right to define its own doctrines and not have them defined by outsiders.

True