The Truth about Mormons

[blu]

all religions are bad shit insane when trying to defend tehir myths. never understood why scientologists get so much flack when a billion christians worship a zombie

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

didnt jesus rise from the dead? what do you think a zombie is?

 

[froggy]

all religions are bad shit insane when trying to defend tehir myths. never understood why scientologists get so much flack when a billion christians worship a zombie

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

didnt jesus rise from the dead? what do you think a zombie is?

Jesus is real and a zombie isn't.

 

[blu]

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

didnt jesus rise from the dead? what do you think a zombie is?

Jesus is real and a zombie isn't.

definition of zombie: "a dead body that has been brought back to life by a supernatural force"

was/is jesus not a zombie?

 

[blu]

all religions are bad shit insane when trying to defend tehir myths. never understood why scientologists get so much flack when a billion christians worship a zombie

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

Remember that it takes more credulity to believe in atheism than religion.

yes because science over stories that make no sense and are provably false takes more credulity

 

[Avatar4321]

all religions are bad shit insane when trying to defend tehir myths. never understood why scientologists get so much flack when a billion christians worship a zombie

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

didnt jesus rise from the dead? what do you think a zombie is?

Rising from the dead alive and rising from the dead undead are not the same.

 

[JohnOneOne]

Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses' "New World Translation" Bible and its rendering of John 1:1, it may interest you to know that there is soon to be published an 18+ year study (as of 01/2010) in support and explanation of their wording of this verse entitled, "What About John 1:1?"

To learn more of its design and expected release date, we invite you to visit:

www dot goodcompanionbooks dot com

Agape, JohnOneOne.

nra4life and 8ball, why play the game. All religion comes down to faith not critical reasoning. That's why Jefferson cut so much out of his redaction of the Bible. In my opinion, I think Jesus is my Lord, I believe the Holy Bible is not His literal word, and I don't believe that JS Jr is a prophet. Give others the same right to believe. If TruthSpeaker were on your doorstep proslytyzing with a BoM in one hand and a couple of Danites at hand, that would be another matter, of course.

JakeStarkey: I highly venerate Jefferson.......but in the area of biblical/spiritual understanding knowledge..........He created an abomination..........when speaking of his infamous "Jeffersonian Bible".

Jefferson took the good old King James that even the Mormons will use when proselytizing Christians, and did a major "cut/paste" job on any bit of bible scripture that he didn't agree with........Actually is was more like, he did a "job" on any scripture that presented man as a sinner. Jefferson, with big letter "P" pride, proceedced to play God, and change the bible to his comfort zone/liking. That's basically it.

It was not an intellectual pursuit of truth, but an attempt to quench or muffle God's assessment of man as a fallen Adamic creature in need of Christ's attoning work at Calvary.
*****
The Jeffersonian bible is not different from the Jehovah's Witnesses "New World Translations" that has conveniently, and suspiciously removed many references in the N.T. to Jesus being God, in the flesh. For instance, the impact of the famous John Chapter 1 verse 1 says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.".

The Jehovah's Witness bible has changed that verse to, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with Jehovah, and the word was "a" god.'.
******

The Mormons, deny will say, sure Jesus is God........but one with God........as in one God...........No! They refute the trinitarian aspect of the Godhead because they don't understand the physical/anotomical/mind blowing chemistry of how Jesus can be God, God the Spirit can be God, and God the Father can be God, and all can be one in the same.

This is where J.S. Jr. along with follow prophets, and other Christian cults, and non-Christian cults have attempted to bring the Godhead down to what their "finite" human minds can understand......

So we have many gods in Mormonism............Makes sense.........but the bible disagree's vehemently. No, the word trinity is not in the bible. It is a word used to describe the best man can of the mysterious makeup of the Godhead, that expresses itself in three distinct personality/forms, but all our in unison or agreement of thought, choice, direction, etc..
*****
Now we have Thomas Jefferson........Born April 13th.........What a statesman! What a great president! What a man of all kinds of talents. One of the best silversmiths of his time...........Actually his father, was a good silversmith to, and actually Jefferson Jr. apprenticed under his dad.

Great men who do great things for humanity and for the world........in unselfishness, and compassion..............doesn't mean they have a ticket to Paradise with God.............It just means they are good people. God weighs man ultimately on another scale, that trumps "great works on earth". He/God judges how man deals with His Son, Jesus. It's as clear as that. There is no grey ground when it comes to man and God............The bridgework to a restored relationship with God is through one Person........His Son. His Son is the ultimate Passover Lamb............He is the end of human priesthoods........that were but a foreshadow of the real and eternal Priest............Jesus Christ.(Check Hebrews in the N.T.)

God's righteousness is a "gift", not a "reward", as Mormonism, and so many other cults of of Christian flavoring, have promoted.

One does not depend on visions, dreams, burning bosoms, to "confirm" if they have received God's truth. If one does, they open themselves to the realm of the great deceiver, Satan. He has access to our dreams, physical phenomena, our emotions, and minds, and can do an incredible job of faking the true God, when....................a seeker, or even a Christian doesn't rely first of all on the "manual", the Word of God........the bible.

Now Mormons say that the bible is not accurrate anymore. Why? Has this omnipotent God who stopped the sun, who parted the Red Sea, who smited armies..........some how become weak and anemic? Has this God of the O.T. become forgetful, and let His scripture become bastardized into untruths, and partial, uncomplete truths?

If the true God, has allowed that, then mankind is hopefully on his own.......as we can't trust this God to give us all we need to receive eternal life, and or a restored relationship with Him that was lost way back in Eden.

The Mormon religion like so many is based on an un-omnipotent Creator. This Mormon creator, couldn't protect his written, inspired message to mankind through the thousands of years. So naturally, we need a J.S. jr. type of religion to fill in the gaps, and the "uncomfortableness" of the repentance/salvation message, and the message of "grace" with a "works based" "reward" system of salvation.

Only manmade religions expect "works/reward" in order to reach some sort of relational goal with their creator.

Only one belief system gives all credit to the Creator, and assesses mankind accurately. Just one look at world or local news in convincing enough that man is not touched with Godly righteousness as a whole. The only redeeming or different aspects usually are stories in the back session of every paper..........Mother Teresa, Franklin Graham, Billy Sunday, George Mueller, John Wesley, Hannah Whitall Smith., Moody.....etc.etc........Folks that taught a and called men, women and children to repentance, and salvation through Jesus Christ.

The "evidence" demands a verdict. Jefferson, avoided the obvious as it apparently was too painful, and too unintellectual to comprehend or to admit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A zombie? That has to go down as one of the most absurd statements on this thread, and there have been some doozies.

Remember that it takes more credulity to believe in atheism than religion.

yes because science over stories that make no sense and are provably false takes more credulity

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

Zombie | Define Zombie at Dictionary.com
the body of a dead person given the semblance of life, but mute and will-less, by a supernatural force, usually for some evil purpose. ...
dictionary.reference.com/browse/zombie -

Jesus was not a zombie.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Too many wholes in JW developmental theology as well as the general narrative of the sect for me to even discuss it here, so I will withdraw from this part of the discussion.

 

[Skeptik]

Too many wholes in JW developmental theology as well as the general narrative of the sect for me to even discuss it here, so I will withdraw from this part of the discussion.

Why not start your own thread, the truth about Jehova's Witnesses? This one has proved interesting enough.

 

[blu]

Remember that it takes more credulity to believe in atheism than religion.

yes because science over stories that make no sense and are provably false takes more credulity

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

 

[JakeStarkey]

yes because science over stories that make no sense and are provably false takes more credulity

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

Fail in logic. Because a scripture may be incorrect has nothing to do with proving religion wrong.

 

[Avatar4321]

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

That's incorrect. Your presuming, like many Christians falsely presume, that in order to be valid, the Bible has to be perfect without error. This is based on a faulty assumption that the Bible is all there is and all there ever will be and despite being touched by imperfect humans will not contain a single flaw.

The problem with that is that humans are flawed. Anything we touch will be less than perfect, no matter how well written or preserved.

God doesn't want us to trust blindly in a Book. He has given us the Bible and many other Books to help us in our journey. But He is always trying to teach us to rely on Him and the Holy Spirit. Some people are afraid of this. Others don't realize this because they don't study the scriptures indepth to understand. Even more our honestly seeking the truth but just don't know where to find it.

This is one of the beauties of Mormonism. We accept the Truth about scripture. We see that is a tool to strengthen our faith in God, but that we are to learn for ourselves from God the things which we study and learn. Without personal revelation mankind cannot be saved. After all, how can you say you know God if all you've done is read about Him in a Book and you've never talked to Him, or followed His counsel, or even sought to know Him?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Avatar, I like your touch of antinomianism; however, I truly think you should let Blu know that you believe in prophets and priesthood today who guide your faith.

 

[Skeptik]

yes because science over stories that make no sense and are provably false takes more credulity

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

Religion = god? No, not even close. God created us, but we created religion. The Bible is just a collection of books written a long time ago, and then copied, recopied, translated and re-translated. It would be a miracle if there were no errors in it.

Further, even if it could be proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Bible was written by charlatans, that would have no effect at all on Bhuddism, Hinduism, or any of thousands of other religions.

Now, go and make a sacrifice to the Pacha Mama. (Mother Earth god of the Quechua).

 

[blu]

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

Religion = god? No, not even close. God created us, but we created religion. The Bible is just a collection of books written a long time ago, and then copied, recopied, translated and re-translated. It would be a miracle if there were no errors in it.

Further, even if it could be proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Bible was written by charlatans, that would have no effect at all on Bhuddism, Hinduism, or any of thousands of other religions.

Now, go and make a sacrifice to the Pacha Mama. (Mother Earth god of the Quechua).

what? "!=" means "not equal"

 

[Skeptik]

what? "!=" means "not equal"

Oh! It does? I didn't know that. I thought ≠ meant not equal.

I guess we're really in agreement, then.

 

[Foxfyre]

You can't prove religion false, though, is the point. You can't prove a god does not exist. And do not give partial definitions if you want to talk about objective science. It's hypocritical.

logic fail. religion != god. I can prove that at least one thing in the bible is wrong, meaning the rest of the book is invalid too, meaning I can prove that religion false.

Religion = god? No, not even close. God created us, but we created religion. The Bible is just a collection of books written a long time ago, and then copied, recopied, translated and re-translated. It would be a miracle if there were no errors in it.

Further, even if it could be proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Bible was written by charlatans, that would have no effect at all on Bhuddism, Hinduism, or any of thousands of other religions.

Now, go and make a sacrifice to the Pacha Mama. (Mother Earth god of the Quechua).

Agree 100% that God created us, but we created religion.

Agree that the Bible has been copied and edited and translated and retranslated over a very long period and there was no way that some human error has not incorporated itself into it.

Disagree 100% that the "Bible is just a collection of books written a long time ago." The Bible is a collection of amazing manuscripts that give us a glimpse into the history, thoughts, perceptions, understandings, concepts, hopes, dreams, fears of a people who lived a long time ago but who had a up close and personal relationship with the living God. Within its pages we find pure history, poetry, symbolism, metaphor, songs, law, prophecy, instruction, allegory, and imagery. They have contributed a huge amount of the understanding that we have of the living God.

 

[Skeptik]

Here's an interesting study that supports the Mormon belief that we humans are really spirits who have lived before, and are here to experience mortal life:

Babies know the difference between good and evil at six months, study reveals

At the age of six months babies can barely sit up - let along take their first tottering steps, crawl or talk.

But, according to psychologists, they have already developed a sense of moral code - and can tell the difference between good and evil.

Of course, the scientific study does not mention a spirit that has already experienced good and evil being in control of that small, new body.

But, that is one explanation of the results, is it not?

 

[froggy]

Joseph Smith Polygamy Sex LDS Mormon

Joey the adulterer

 

[Avatar4321]

Joseph Smith Polygamy Sex LDS Mormon

Joey the adulterer

You do realize that you can't commit adultery with someone you are married to right?