Mormon Teachings

[Marlin]

very good point you brought up on these two things, however you could have mis interpreted deu. "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you"

Doesn't mean the lord can't add unto it

Exactly. The Lord can add to His previous words as he pleases, through prophets such as Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, and in our day, Gordon B. Hinckley.

Second rev. uses many many difference's then other prophecy's in the bible how can you be sure that rev. 22:18,19 could only be speaking of rev. and not of all of the prophecy's. Besides this commandment also came from the tree of life..... It goes for all the phrophets word.

Now im not to up-to-date on the christian church or muslim church... im jewish although I still study all of the books as best I can. Don't get me wrong I just find it interesting...

Again, the Book of Revelation was not part of the other prophecies when it was written. The New Testament as we have it was not completed or canonized in John's day, so the only "book of this prophecy" that he referred to was his own, the Book of Revelation. This book was not even the last one written that was canonized in the NT, so interpreting it as such shows ignorance of that process.

 

[Jenyar]

Marlin,

Does God speak ONLY through Mormon prophets, and has He ever said anything in addition to Christ's testimony? Where did God add anything to the commandments He gave at Horeb (Deut.4)? Which books that were written after Rev. were included in the canon? And lastly, since no 'Bible' existed before Rev, from where were the 'plain and precious truths' removed?

 

[RickyH]

http://www.irr.org/mit/bombible.html


Argue those for me will you

 

[Marlin]

http://www.irr.org/mit/bombible.html


Argue those for me will you

The IRR web site is your typical anti-Mormon propaganda site; it teaches half-truths, distortions, and misinterpretations of LDS doctrine and is highly biased against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. You can't expect enemies of the Church to present a balanced picture of LDS beliefs.

Would you go to angry Pharisees to find out the truth about Jesus? Would you go to Pharaoh to get the scoop on Moses? Or would you suspect that the enemies of truth are distorting and misrepresenting it?

That said, here is the first answer for you.

IRR says:

1. The Book of Mormon teaches that little children are not capable of sin because they do not have a sinful nature (Moroni 8:8). In contrast, the Bible in Psalm 51:5 clearly teaches that we have sinful nature from birth: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (NIV). (This does not mean that those who die in infancy are lost.*)

Here are some scriptures that indicate that little children are alive in Christ and are without sin:

Matt. 18:3 Except that ye...become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom

Matt. 19:14 Of such [little children] is the kingdom of God


Go here for more on the salvation of little children:

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/family/children/salvation_eom.htm

 

[RickyH]

did you not look any farther in that site? There is TONS of stuff supporting the morman bible in it.... if anything it is a pro morman site

BEsides that is only one point..... and it still doesn't answer the fact of it being a contradiction

 

[RickyH]

http://www.irr.org/mit/jsfalpro.html

A phrophet with failed phroceys.... how can this be??

 

[Marlin]

As far as I can tell, IRR is anti-Mormon in nature and seeks to disprove the divine nature and authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

If you want to know more about Mormonism, please look in the phone book under Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and ask that the Elders come and teach you the discussions. I cannot answer every objection--there isn't enough time to research every little "contradiction" (as IRR would say).

Here is a link to the Fall of Adam home page in All About Mormons web site:

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/gospel/fall/index.htm

 

[RickyH]

or if you have good enough internet watch this

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8594203721530427132

 

[RickyH]

yes but the irr is sponsered by the religous research foundation they are well respected in there work and would not give you half trueth's they give you everythign researched in labratory's they heven have research done by VERY dedicated to there mormanism look at the research and do it themselve's and most of them come out converted

Besides native american's arn't from any isreal decent watch the video

 

[Marlin]

yes but the irr is sponsered by the religous research foundation they are well respected in there work and would not give you half trueth's they give you everythign researched in labratory's they heven have research done by VERY dedicated to there mormanism look at the research and do it themselve's and most of them come out converted

Besides native american's arn't from any isreal decent watch the video

I've seen the video and am not impressed with it.

Here are just some titles of the IRR web site that prove to be hostile to Mormonism:

"Dr. Simon Southerton [a noted anti-Mormon] Replies to Apologist Dr. Ryan Parr on DNA and Book of Mormon Issues"

"Answers to FARMS [pro-Mormon researchers] Objections to DNA Evidence Against the Book of Mormon"

"Mormon General Authority Questions Book of Mormon AUthorship"

"Translation or Divination"

"Contradictions Between the Book of Mormon and the Bible"

If they sponsor articles against the Church via anti-Mormons like Simon Southerton; if they provide "answers" against pro-Mormons like FARMS; if they name-drop a General Authority as questioning BofM authorship; if they say the BofM is divination rather than translation; and if they seek to find contradictions between the BofM and the Bible;

Then, my friend, there's a good chance they are anti-Mormons. Pro-Mormon sites do not seek to tear down LDS doctrines.

 

[RickyH]

Well can you tell me one thing if native american's from your beleif which is the basis of your beleif are supposed to be directly from israel... but no dna evidence link's them anywhere NEAR israel..... but from syberia... 99.4% actually and .6% from europe or africa.... not only dna proof but historical proof ...there is absolutly no proof what-so-ever that they came form israel...none not a single peice of evidence can you tell me how you can have faith in this? Also with all the contradiction's that the bom has, and the deceptiveness your prophet has?

 

[Marlin]

Well can you tell me one thing if native american's from your beleif which is the basis of your beleif are supposed to be directly from israel... but no dna evidence link's them anywhere NEAR israel..... but from syberia... 99.4% actually and .6% from europe or africa.... not only dna proof but historical proof ...there is absolutly no proof what-so-ever that they came form israel...none not a single peice of evidence can you tell me how you can have faith in this? Also with all the contradiction's that the bom has, and the deceptiveness your prophet has?

As they haven't tested every single Native American's DNA yet, we don't have the complete picture to rely on for an accurate appraisal of ALL Native American DNA. The jury is still out on that issue. The Book of Mormon doesn't claim to be a record of ALL the Native Americans, anyway, just of three groups (Jaredites, Lehites, and Mulekites) that came to the Americas.

You're reading too much anti-Mormon stuff, Ricky. I advise you to peruse the following web sites to get some pro-Mormon information:

The official Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints site

Official LDS Information site

All About Mormons (VERY exhaustive site, user friendly)

FAIR (Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research)

 

[RickyH]

if they could have a war with over 230,000 deaths im more then positive they have tested those 3 tribes

Plus it says how native americans came to america...... tell me where it doesn't say anything about discluding any native american tribes wouldn't your phrphet have been more correct in saying 3 tribes and not native americans in general?

He said native american in general use several times how can you prove he wasn't talking about all native americans

Just a thought

 

[Marlin]

Prophets are not infallible and don't know everything. There have been times in every religion's history when true believers have just had to say, "Okay, we were wrong about such-and-such, so let's modify our beliefs and keep on learning."

Plus, the Jaredites were all but totally destroyed (one man survived); the Nephites were completely wiped out; and only the Lamanites survived.

There is a reason they call these first two civilizations "extinct." Learn it, believe it.

 

[RickyH]

well either way you cannot deny the fact that the lamanites where supposidly a massive race. There for there would be a quite large number of them around today........ or there would not have been battles on massive preportions.(odds are they where tested).... and if they where from hebrew decent wouldn't they have hebrew influences...well they don't it is very obvious of that..... there is absolutly nothing to the contrary of this....

besides why would i go to a pro morman website when they would use propaganda just like an anti morman site would why not go to a website sponsered by a religous research group? like the irr

your book is supposed to be the most correct book of the word of god.... although it is not knowledgable at all god's basis on knowing if a phrophet is real or not is if it is knowledgable

 

[Marlin]

well either way you cannot deny the fact that the lamanites where supposidly a massive race. There for there would be a quite large number of them around today........ or there would not have been battles on massive preportions.(odds are they where tested).... and if they where from hebrew decent wouldn't they have hebrew influences...well they don't it is very obvious of that..... there is absolutly nothing to the contrary of this....

I'm not an archaeologist, nor have I studied Native American or Hebrew history or culture. I have to admit that this is one of my weak spots. I know that the Book of Mormon is true, however.

besides why would i go to a pro morman website when they would use propaganda just like an anti morman site would why not go to a website sponsered by a religous research group? like the irr

Or like FAIR? Excuses, excuses...

your book is supposed to be the most correct book of the word of god.... although it is not knowledgable at all god's basis on knowing if a phrophet is real or not is if it is knowledgable

Moroni 10:3-5. Read and apply regularly with sincere prayer and real intent. Testimony will come.

 

[RickyH]

tesimony will not come you have several phrocey's that havn't come true

 

[Marlin]

tesimony will not come you have several phrocey's that havn't come true

Not so.

Did Joseph Smith Prophesy Falsely?

 

[RickyH]

Prophecy # 1 — The Coming of the Lord

President Smith then stated that the meeting had been called, because God had commanded it; and it was made known to him by vision and by the Holy Spirit. . . . it was the will of God that they should be ordained to the ministry and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh — even fifty six years should wind up the scene. (History of the Church, Vol. 2, page 182).

This prophecy was spoken by Joseph Smith in 1835, and recorded by Oliver Cowdery. The fifty-six years were passed by 1891.

thats one from the irr website but do your own research on that...tell me what you come up with i can assure you will find that is to be a false phophesy....and its just one of several more...

 

[gregory85]

Mormans also beleived Joseph Smith was a prophet, said indians were actualy isrealites who were burned for turning on jesus (and some how made it to america). The church also said Blacks didnt have souls and could not be saved (that changed recently). Its nice when you can doctor up a beleif system to meet the acceptance of a current culture but the past in the end is hard to hide. Im not saying what it has become is not useful for some people, if it makes them a better person so be it. But all things must be taken into context.