Mormonism isn't very old, I think it's because their many people's great great grandparents remembered when Joseph Smith made it up and passed the incredibility down to their children. So Joseph Smith was a false prophet for Christians.
Why Christians reject Mormonism?
- Thread starter 786
- Start date
Well this is an honest question.
What arguments do Christians have to reject Mormonism? I'm not a Mormon so don't go attacking me
Peace be unto you
Well there are two doctrines of mormonism that i can think of right now that disqualify their supposed prophet from being a true messenger of the God of Abraham.
1) mormonism teaches that all true mormons will become gods and that they will be gods of their own worlds.
In the bible satan used the same enticement when he told adam and eve they would be as God if they obtained the knowledge of Good and Evil. So:
satan: "believe me and you will be Gods"
mormonism: "believe mormonism and you will be Gods"
2) mormonism teaches that Jesus and satan are "spirit brothers" that Jesus is an angel and not the Word of God made flesh.
This runs totally against what the Bible says about Jesus. There are a lot of other things that they teach that are against the teachings of Jesus.
Just those two are enough for anyone who believes Jesus to reject mormanism as a false religion.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
LOL . looks like they loved their lives in this world more that the supposed "truth"??? that there founder delivered to them from that supposed "angel"???
"forced a revelation" that made me laugh hard
Just the kind of doctrine you would expect to be delivered to attract followers who are governed by the desires of carnal lust. Almost as bad as the filthy whore house of an eternity muhammad promised his degenerate and violent followers. Same lure, hey would it not be ironic if it turns out that both of them met the same "angel"???
Oh Jesus said on the Matter:
Matthew 22
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.
So not one wife and not multiple wives. But No wives at all.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
My understanding of Christianity is that it requires only a belief in Christ as Savior and Lord. LDS or Mormons do believe that is true. In the LDS religion as in other Christian sects, the Devil is believed to be a fallen angel.
I think people should be free to beleive as they will as long as it does not hurt others. I think it benefits no one to be calling other religions false. If you get into virtually any Western religion you can find holes and disconnects.
You used a very important word there:
What do you think it means to believe in Jesus as ones LORD. Lord is Master, Lord is God. How can anyone say they hold Jesus as LORD when they call Him a Liar when they say they will have multiple wives in eternity???
Jesus said this:
Matthew 22
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.
So how can one call Jesus LORD when they do not believe what He say and preach in opposition to His Word.
Yeah millions want Jesus as their Savior but tragically very few want Him as their LORD and the mormons are just another group who conform to that observation.
If you believe that it's ok to leave people to believe in lies unchallenged and in darkness then you believe in the worse kind of Hated imaginable.
And yeah there are a lot of denominations who have their own versions of Jesus teachings removed or Jesus teachings added to. And they too should have their "traditions" challenged. So at lest then they have the opportunity to accept Jesus as LORD and Savior. Otherwise they will just go on believing in "another Jesus" and that will bring their faith to no effect.
2 Corrinthians 11
2 For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it!
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
The problem is everyone has there own version of truth. And the truth is that all of the gospels now in use have issues. They contradict themselves...just look at the differences the account of Christ's birth.
The texts we use today do not have a prestine line of authority. Rather they are a collection of books over time. Some books we know have been lost. So bottom line is that if we apply the firm rigour of logic, no one really knows what the exact words or teachings were.
What we do know is the teachings of Christ differ from the Pauline version of Christianity that is generally accepted as Christianity. Mormons by the way believe that the authority of Christ was revoved from the Earth because early followers strayed from Christ's teachings. And the church of Christ was only restored to Earth when Smith received his visions.
So when you say truth, I have to as you who's truth? My point is there is no one truth. Instead there are many different beliefs each with their own spurious claim to truth. And the truth is most people can't handle the truth. But then does it matter? Probably not.
The texts we use today do not have a prestine line of authority. Rather they are a collection of books over time. Some books we know have been lost. So bottom line is that if we apply the firm rigour of logic, no one really knows what the exact words or teachings were.
What we do know is the teachings of Christ differ from the Pauline version of Christianity that is generally accepted as Christianity. Mormons by the way believe that the authority of Christ was revoved from the Earth because early followers strayed from Christ's teachings. And the church of Christ was only restored to Earth when Smith received his visions.
So when you say truth, I have to as you who's truth? My point is there is no one truth. Instead there are many different beliefs each with their own spurious claim to truth. And the truth is most people can't handle the truth.
But then does it matter? Probably not.What contradictory accounts of Christ’s birth are you referring to?
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
I do agree that Mormons have polygamy but so does the OT, the NT has no direct verdict against polygamy.
Secondly I don't think incest is necessarily an outcome of polygamy, that would only be that almost everyone was polygamous, I would doubt that women today would allow or even consider a polygamous marriage so the percentage of polygamous marriage couldn't possibly be large enough to require the society to adopt incest as a means to "make a viable breeding stock".
Peace be unto you
Polygamy necessarily reduces the "effective breeding size" (= effective breeding population) by the exclusion of numerous male genomes. Over time, I would expect this naturally results in some increases in inbreeding. The most viable strategy is pair-breeding, or else free breeding: but, again, some males would dominate this arrangement (yours truly, for example) and so it isn't genetically viable either, in the long run.
Hahaha!!
I don't understand why the most "viable" strategy is pair-breeding/free breeding? That is very interesting to me. I would have thought the best strategy for the species is the best suited to the environment pressure breeds. And it seems we have a lot of social groups in the animal kingdom where the strongest male gets a lot poontang and the "littler" males sneak in a peace for themselves once in awhile.
I believe in the orangutan males remain the size of females (around 75kg) UNTIL the Alpha male dirty-old-bastard dies off and then all of the small males will increase in weight to around 150kg? And then kill one another off. Leaving a new alpha male. HOWEVER, prior to the old geezer dieing off, the little males often rape females and genetic testing shows that ~25% of offspring are not from the alpha male but from raped female orangutans. The alpha male simply has too much land to watch over to effectively watch over every single female - which herself has her own area of land. Of course all of this has evolved - even the so called raping.
Why is it that pair-breeding societies out compete polygamous societies for humans?
I think you're talking in completely theoretical perspective; I don't think the percentage of the polygamy will be large enough in human society (as a whole) that it would alter population dynamics enough to cause inbreeding. One thing that needs to be understood is that polygamy can be as an effect of sexual selection. Likewise if sexual selection (which would depend upon a society as well) is anti-polygamy then the genetic diversity will be higher. Yes there is potential of lowering genetic diversity by basically leaving some males without female partners- but that is assuming that polygamous marriages will saturate the society to an extent that no females are left- which I don't think will practically happen especially as society changes its attitude about polygamy. Assuming that a portion of males and females will be left- then to maximize fitness they would match up. Also there is a factor of those individuals who wish to abstain from marriage, and also the concept of divorce, and cheating. There are so many things happening that the effects would be negligible with respect to inbreeding.
Peace be unto you
That depends entirely on - as you point out - the proportion of the polygamy in a given society.
Again: that depends entirely on proportion.
Actually, this wouldn't necessarily be due to fitness in human society. Humans have learned to use resources to escape the consequences of fitness.
Polygamous societies frequently establish severe penalties for either - another consequence of the advantage of resources. It tends to be harshly selected against.
Peace be unto you
And to you.
Hmm... Fitness is measured by the number of offspring that survive, in other words it has to do with reproduction...
The fact there are consequences doesn't mean that humans will not do it.... It won't be 'fullblown' but such activities would still be taking place.
Peace be unto you
They don't like them because they chase you around door to door in suits and sometimes they are stinky.
Offspring surviving is generally a good sign, but in transition periods there may a hit to survival as the species adapts. Also, too many offspring surviving can be bad, like us right now overshooting the carrying capacity.
Fitness is really about fitting the changing circumstances of the moment.
Of course, you do need to be alive to reproduce, no?
This applies to the number of surviving offspring also. Multiplicative fitness.Yes, but at very low frequency. Enough to make a difference to quantitative genetics and/or fitness? Hard to say. There's the old truism about a single 'migrant' per generation...but against 1/(2N) it seems like bollocks.
Peace be unto you
And unto you.