Mormon Teachings

[Cottontop3000]

And you try bearing the weight of the sins of the entire world on *your* head someday, and then say that it is no sacrifice.

Marlin,

Lay it on me brother. Then crucify me. I'm about the age of Christ when he died. I'd die for your sins too. Since "He" was human for his short stay on Earth, I'm sure I can handle what he did. In fact, I know I can because I do it everyday. If it sounds like I'm hurting here, you're right. I have a supposed mental disorder called Major Depressive Disorder. Personally, I think it's more like simple disillusionment and disgust with my race, the human race. So scared of everything, and yet so sure of themselves at the same time. Just kill me and get it over with already. :bugeye:

 

[Marlin]

Cottontop3000, well, thanks for the offer, but Jesus was the only person capable of bearing the crushing weight of the world's sins, since He was half God. No mortal man could possibly have borne it.

I've suffered from depression in the past too. It is an awful, debilitating disorder. But this, too, shall pass.

 

[Cottontop3000]

Yeah, life does go on. No hard feelings mate.

 

[SnakeLord]

Cottontop: Frank Herbert

Fear of death? Not really. Fear of eternal hell? Definitely.

How truly crippling such a belief must be. I do honestly feel sorry for you.

 

[Cottontop3000]

Yausa, Yausa, Yausa!!

Lucky Guess, Snake Lord!

Someone's got that as their signature in their user profile, though I forget who.
I love those books. Have you read Frank Herbert's son's books? Their good, but just not the same. His style is a lot different. More reader friendly than the father's, but just not the same.

 

[water]

Marlin and Brutus,


I will not discuss with you any longer.

You present God to be merely a release from evil, you don't present Him as the source of good.

You deify man and humanize God.

You make salvation a business transaction, a contract between two parties.

Your doctrine is that of the devil.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

If you reject the evidence (from "Mormon-only sources"), then there is no evidence (to you).

the whole world rejects it, because it is self-serving, unsubstanciated goobely-gook, theres more tangents than a math book
& more himming & hawing than if you were a prize polititian or spinmiester

I am insulted that you would talk about my religion as if it were just some "Star Trek convention" gone amiss. You, sir, are very offensive.

the truth hurts, & as Jesus said, "the truth will set you free" (John 8:32)

Polygamy is sanctioned in the Book of Mormon, provided that God commands it. Jacob 2:30 states plainly that "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me [through polygamy], I will command my people;"

funny, how my March 1994 version of the BoM don't say whats in the brackets? is that from the new up-dated 2004 version? or could it be because its not there?
& if it was god's command, why did the LDS church give it up without a fight? the South fought a bloody 4 year war for states rights, yet the LDS leadership gave up without a wimper? for shame, for shame

Man's progression to godhood in the Book of Mormon:
2 Nephi 2:25 Men are that they might have joy
3 Nephi 9:17 To them have I given to become the sons of God
3 Nephi 27:27 What manner of men ought ye to be? Even as I am
3 Nephi 28:10 Your joy shall be full...shall be even as I am

reading more than what the text says, wishful thinking

Adam-God theory: It's not in the Book of Mormon because it is FALSE doctrine.

sorry, but you just called your own prophets FALSE, & you know what that means?

I can't find a reference for spirit children in the Book of Mormon right now, other than those verses that speak of Man as a spirit child of God.

keep looking

Baptism for the Dead is found in the Bible (1 Cor. 15:29), so it's hardly a false doctrine.

read the whole verse, its the only one that ever mentions this, why? Paul neither approves nor disapproves what the Corinthian church did, why? can you start a whole doctrine out of one verse? sure, if you're a cult, you need pulp for the fiction

Threefold heaven: The Book of Mormon (to my knowledge) doesn't specifically mention the two lower heavens (Terrestrial or Telestial), but this is because we aren't to set our sites on those lower heavens. The scriptures are for the "Church of the Firstborn," or the Celestial Kingdom, and it is that kingdom that the BoM speaks of when it mentions heaven. That doesn't mean the other kingdoms were "added" or "evolved" by Joseph Smith's thinking. It simply means that the Celestial is what the Church is to be concerned with.

thats exactly what it means, but since you are caught in mormonism, you have to "rationalize" any inconsistancies

"Kolob," or the star near where God's throne is, is not mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon.

its neither in the Bible, could it be because mormonism is as you say, "a 'Star Trek convention' gone amiss"?

I believe everything the Book of Mormon says, hands down, no reservations whatsoever. Please don't insult my intelligence, Randolfo.

your intelligence is not in question here, but the lenghts you will go to rationalize your beliefs, given unsupportable doctrines, or contrary evidence for the BoM & BoA
no reservations? lets try a little verse-proofing here?
how about Jacob 2:27?

 

[WildBlueYonder]

but Jesus was the only person capable of bearing the crushing weight of the world's sins, since He was half God. No mortal man could possibly have borne it.

half? what theology is that? read the Bible again, He was fully God & fully man, start with the Gospels & then read the "Letter to the Hebrews"

 

[Marlin]

water, I'm sorry you feel that way.

Randolfo, I'm not even going to discuss things with you until you change your offensive, contentious ways. Discussion is one thing, but contention is of the devil and is not productive at all.

 

[SnakeLord]

Yausa, Yausa, Yausa!!

Lucky Guess, Snake Lord!

Guess = no, google = yes Sorry dude, I cheated.

Someone's got that as their signature in their user profile, though I forget who.
I love those books. Have you read Frank Herbert's son's books? Their good, but just not the same. His style is a lot different. More reader friendly than the father's, but just not the same.

Can't say I have. I haven't read fiction in years - other than the bible. Before that it was Philip Jose Farmer's Riverworld series.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Randolfo, I'm not even going to discuss things with you until you change your offensive, contentious ways. Discussion is one thing, but contention is of the devil and is not productive at all.

I take it you read Jacob 2:27? what a disconnect, reading one thing in the BoM & knowing that those very same early prophets that were supposed to be responsible for Restoring the church out of apostasy, where in reality "apostate" Rams over the female flock

 

[Jenyar]

Because your eternal salvation hangs in the balance, that's why.

According to Mormon doctrine, she already has that, along with everyone else. How can it hang in the balance?

 

[Marlin]

According to Mormon doctrine, she already has that, along with everyone else. How can it hang in the balance?

According to Mormon teachings, we must repent, be baptized, and keep all the commandments to be saved in the Celestial Kingdom (the highest Kingdom of God). No one is automatically saved--not even in the lower kingdoms--without obedience to the commandments. I don't know where you got the idea that salvation is automatic, because it isn't.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

If you reject the evidence (from "Mormon-only sources"), then there is no evidence (to you).

untrue, if it were real scholarship, it would transend mormon sources & hit the big time, image the SI & NG doing digs in the Mid-West for BoM relics? it would be huge, absolutly gold-rush, why scientists would be tripping over eachother to get there first, they would maybe even elbow BYU out, as in what Drumler did to Ellie in "Contact".

I believe everything the Book of Mormon says, hands down, no reservations whatsoever.

and Jacob 2:27?

Please don't insult my intelligence, Randolfo.

as I said intelligence is not an issue, its how you resolve inconsistencies by rationalizing them, the BoM plainly states "no polygamy" in Jacob 2:27, yet most of the early founders followed it to the hilt, first in secrecy (Joe Smith did it first), then more openly in Utah, until the US gov got involved

explain it, were they sinners? or prophets?
did they get it wrong? were they wrong?
& if you needed plural wives to populate your new "assigned" earths, what are modren mormons to do, if they no longer have access to these wives? do they get planetoids or asteroid belts as their rewards instead?

 

[Marlin]

Randolfo, I'm still waiting for a sincere apology from you for calling my religion a "Star Trek convention" and a "cult." I won't discuss anything further with you until you do that and speak more respectfully of my religion.

 

[Mr.Jack4WAR]

mormons hehe , have yall seen that one south park episode where they bag on Joseph Smith, hahaha

 

[Mr.Jack4WAR]

hail southpark

 

[Mr.Jack4WAR]

Hail it i say! :m: <<and hail that shit too

 

[WildBlueYonder]

There is no way to trace the DNA from anyone from the tribe of Joseph because we do not have any samples of people that we also know to be from this tribe. We cannot assume that someone from the tribe of Judah would have similar DNA or any DNA just because they shared one common ancestor. It is just like if you took a Jewish person in America and compared their DNA with a Jew in Israel. Even if they both had a common ancestor a couple of thousand years ago I doubt that a match would be made.
Have they ever been able to match Indian and Asian DNA and get a match? I doubt it. Too much time and too many generations have gone by.

you need to know more about mtDNA & Y chromosome DNA studies, because apparently this is a weak point in your knowledge base

http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/introduction.html
http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/dna_tests.htm

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Randolfo, I'm still waiting for a sincere apology from you for calling my religion a "Star Trek convention" and a "cult." I won't discuss anything further with you until you do that and speak more respectfully of my religion.

if you answer honestly what the passage of Jacob 2:27 means in your thoughts, I might consider apologizing for the ST statement, but "cult", so sorry, any church that turns around facts, changes fundamental church doctrine & then says they are the only 'true church' is a "cult". the BoM & BoA can't stand the light of day, the LDS church will have to refute those documents & go on its merry way as 'mormon' or join mainstream 'Christianity' after it denies the BoM & BoA & takes up only the Bible as its foundation & Jesus as their only Savior. anything less & its still a "cult"

also correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the LDS & Joe Smith start out calling Christianity as "an abomination", "the whore of Babylon", etc.? don't you think that to? are you going to apologize first for all those slights?