Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

[Shadows-shine]

SickTwistedFreak25

I am not a Mormon, but I do think that they are Christian, and I do think that the Book of Mormon is true. I have been studying Mormonism all summer, and reading The Book of Mormon and I think that it is very interesting.
and I think that Joseph Smith is a very interesting person as well.

I am actually relieved to see a thread like this. I don't see many Mormon's in Christian guilds.

I have to say that Mormonism/LDS, makes more sense (to me) than a lot of other religions.

That's interesting. I don't meet too many people who believe the Book of Mormon is true, but yet aren't LDS. I used to hold the same belief that you do until I converted to the Church a few years ago. Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

The way it was explained to me, when I was investigating the Church was, it's like taking three cirlces that are interconnected. One reperesenting the Book of Mormon, the other Joseph Smith, and the third the Church. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith is a prophet, and if Joseph is a prophet, then the Church is true.  

[Shadows-shine]

Testicular Diabetes

gothic_black_rose

Shadows-shine

Testicular Diabetes

I have a Mormon friend, shes pretty cool. I was always told that they wrote their own Bible or something like that. I don't know how true that is, I have nothing against them.
I'm not fond of the whole Polygamy thing but not all Mormons partake in that either.
I believe in coexisting with others instead of prosecuting them.

No, the LDS did not write their own bible.


Polygamy is no longer practiced.

I guess the group in Texas didn't get the memo that polygamy isn't practiced.

Or Utah.

Those groups of people are not associated nor affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Church has already made that clear. So you can't cite those people and say that mormons practice polygamy still.  

[Shadows-shine]

SickTwistedFreak25

Shadows-shine

SickTwistedFreak25

I am not a Mormon, but I do think that they are Christian, and I do think that the Book of Mormon is true. I have been studying Mormonism all summer, and reading The Book of Mormon and I think that it is very interesting.
and I think that Joseph Smith is a very interesting person as well.

I am actually relieved to see a thread like this. I don't see many Mormon's in Christian guilds.

I have to say that Mormonism/LDS, makes more sense (to me) than a lot of other religions.

That's interesting. I don't meet too many people who believe the Book of Mormon is true, but yet aren't LDS. I used to hold the same belief that you do until I converted to the Church a few years ago. Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

The way it was explained to me, when I was investigating the Church was, it's like taking three circles that are interconnected. One representing the Book of Mormon, the other Joseph Smith, and the third the Church. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith is a prophet, and if Joseph is a prophet, then the Church is true.

I see what you are getting at. And you're right.

I am not really part of any denomination right now. I am just kinda doing my own thing, and doing research.

But there is to much evidence to suggest that the book of Mormon is true... plus after reading through a lot of it, I can't see Joseph Smith making all of this stuff up.

and I dunno if you had heard about this or not so I will link you to it.

http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/decalog.html

http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/loslunas.html

There is no way Joseph Smith could have made it up. He was an uneducated farm boy from upperstate New York. There is no possible way he would have known of the complex history of the people from the Book of Mormon or in Mesoamerica (which is the approx. location of where the Book of Mormon took place), especially since most of the scholars in his time knew nothing about it.

I have heard of the decalog and the loslunas. Scholars aren't sure if they are legit though because there is no way for them to test the stones without damaging the "history" behind them. Plus the rock that has the ten commandments on it has been vandelized to the point that it's hard to say which marks are legit and which are from tourists walking by the rock.

One thing I have found interesting is that the American Indians have known the stories of the Old Testament long before Columbus and the Catholic Fathers and Priest have come over to America. No scholar has been able to explain that. Plus there are some sections of the Cherokee tribe that feel a connection to the Hebrews. DNA and RNA doesn't prove that they are of Hebrew decent, but DNA and RNA is only reliable up to a certain point.


Here is a link for you as well. I found it interesting and there is a lot of information on it.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml  

[WoodSorrelWitch]

Shadows-shine

Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

I would say that Joseph Smith is a false prophet.  

[Shadows-shine]

SickTwistedFreak25

Shadows-shine

There is no way Joseph Smith could have made it up. He was an uneducated farm boy from upperstate New York. There is no possible way he would have known of the complex history of the people from the Book of Mormon or in Mesoamerica (which is the approx. location of where the Book of Mormon took place), especially since most of the scholars in his time knew nothing about it.

I have heard of the decalog and the loslunas. Scholars aren't sure if they are legit though because there is no way for them to test the stones without damaging the "history" behind them. Plus the rock that has the ten commandments on it has been vandelized to the point that it's hard to say which marks are legit and which are from tourists walking by the rock.

One thing I have found interesting is that the American Indians have known the stories of the Old Testament long before Columbus and the Catholic Fathers and Priest have come over to America. No scholar has been able to explain that. Plus there are some sections of the Cherokee tribe that feel a connection to the Hebrews. DNA and RNA doesn't prove that they are of Hebrew decent, but DNA and RNA is only reliable up to a certain point.


Here is a link for you as well. I found it interesting and there is a lot of information on it.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml

Didn't he also have a third grade education? I am not really sure on that. There is no way that he could do something like, write the Book of Mormon, by himself.

Also, if you look on down the page, of the Decalogue, I found it interesting, at the way they (the Indians) had their town laid out.

I have some Cherokee blood in me. My dad knows a lot of their stories about some of their beliefs smile

and thank you for the link, I'll be looking through it. ^_^

You're welcome!
I will have to read the rest of the link when I get the chance.  

[Shadows-shine]

PawzPrint

Shadows-shine

Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

I would say that Joseph Smith is a false prophet.

And this is where I am going to say, PROOF! Have you tested the fruits of Joseph Smith? The Bible teaches that by their fruits ye shall know them. Jospeh Smith has produced no fruits that show that he is a false prophet.  

[WoodSorrelWitch]

Shadows-shine

PawzPrint

Shadows-shine

Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

I would say that Joseph Smith is a false prophet.

And this is where I am going to say, PROOF! Have you tested the fruits of Joseph Smith? The Bible teaches that by their fruits ye shall know them. Jospeh Smith has produced no fruits that show that he is a false prophet.

The Bible also teaches us:

Deut 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him."

Example:

STARS WILL FALL: Dec 27, 1832. D&C 88:87. Earth shall tremble and reel, the sun shall not give light, the moon shall be bathed in blood, the stars shall "become exceedingly angry" and fall, all "not many days hence."

FULFILLMENT: More than 59,000 days have now passed, and this prophecy has not been fulfilled.  

[Shadows-shine]

PawzPrint

Shadows-shine

PawzPrint

Shadows-shine

Now I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

I would say that Joseph Smith is a false prophet.

And this is where I am going to say, PROOF! Have you tested the fruits of Joseph Smith? The Bible teaches that by their fruits ye shall know them. Jospeh Smith has produced no fruits that show that he is a false prophet.

The Bible also teaches us:

Deut 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him."

Example:

STARS WILL FALL: Dec 27, 1832. D&C 88:87. Earth shall tremble and reel, the sun shall not give light, the moon shall be bathed in blood, the stars shall "become exceedingly angry" and fall, all "not many days hence."

FULFILLMENT: More than 59,000 days have now passed, and this prophecy has not been fulfilled.

Hmm...Do you know how many prophecies have been given in the Bible and they still have not come to pass? Does that make all those prophets false too? By your logic it does.

Oh and that revelation that in D&C could have been metaphorically speaking. Not all scripture is to be taken as literal! Oh and just so you know, the date you cited, is the date the revelation was received on. It has nothing to do as to when the prophecy was to be fulfilled!


And according to your religion, the OT is no longer valid for Christians, except for historical purposes.  

[WoodSorrelWitch]

Shadows-shine

Hmm...Do you know how many prophecies have been given in the Bible and they still have not come to pass? Does that make all those prophets false too? By your logic it does.

Oh and that revelation that in D&C could have been metaphorically speaking. Not all scripture is to be taken as literal! Oh and just so you know, the date you cited, is the date the revelation was received on. It has nothing to do as to when the prophecy was to be fulfilled!


And according to your religion, the OT is no longer valid for Christians, except for historical purposes.

Love the new avatar :3

I know there are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. In the example I posted, the key words are "not many days hence". That's what I'm focusing on currently. According to my source, it's been over 59k days. Would anyone say that that amount is "not many"?

I'm not talking about taking scripture literally, I'm talking about taking prophecies literally. All one has to do to prove that a prophet is false is to show one prophecy that has not happened.  

[Shadows-shine]

PawzPrint

Shadows-shine

Hmm...Do you know how many prophecies have been given in the Bible and they still have not come to pass? Does that make all those prophets false too? By your logic it does.

Oh and that revelation that in D&C could have been metaphorically speaking. Not all scripture is to be taken as literal! Oh and just so you know, the date you cited, is the date the revelation was received on. It has nothing to do as to when the prophecy was to be fulfilled!


And according to your religion, the OT is no longer valid for Christians, except for historical purposes.

Love the new avatar :3

I know there are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled. In the example I posted, the key words are "not many days hence". That's what I'm focusing on currently. According to my source, it's been over 59k days. Would anyone say that that amount is "not many"?

I'm not talking about taking scripture literally, I'm talking about taking prophecies literally. All one has to do to prove that a prophet is false is to show one prophecy that has not happened.

Thanks ^^

And my point about the prophecy you cited is the date on the revelation is the date Joseph Smith receieved it on. He never said within that specific revelation that the events would occur on some specific date. Just because at the beginning of the verse in D&C 88:87 it says "For not many days hence..." That could many any thing, hours,days, weeks, months, years, millenia, aeons, etc. But days in whose time? Gods or ours?

Besides, this revelation is concerning the end of the world. So we may be alive to see it come to pass or we may not. Since none of know when the end of the world is to come, but yet it's prophesied about all throughout the NT, but yet those prophecies have not come to pass either...

59000 days really isn't that long, considering that the prophecies yet to be fulfilled in the Bible have been given several hundred or several thousand years ago. So, again, I am guessing again that by your logic that because some of Isaiah's prophecies, John the Revelators prophecies, and even some of Christ's prophecies have not come to pass or occured, that makes them false prophets as well.  

[WoodSorrelWitch]

And this example?

Quote:

Joseph Smith was also interested in the second coming of Jesus Christ. So much so, that he tried to peg Christ’s return to a particular year – 1891. Smith said, “It is the will of the Lord that those who went to Zion, with a determination to lay down their lives, if necessary, should be ordained to the ministry, and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, or the coming of the Lord, which was night – even fifty-six years, should wind up the scene.” (The History of the Church, vol II, page 182). Zion here refers to Jackson County, Missouri – not to Israel. Given the context in which this was said, the fifty-six year time frame would place the return of Jesus on or before February 14, 1891. Many Mormon periodicals demonstrated that zealous Mormons were anxiously awaiting the fulfillment of that prophecy. February 14, 1891 came and went with no second coming. It was truly a disappointing Valentine’s Day for many faithful Mormons.

 

[Shadows-shine]

PawzPrint

And this example?

Quote:

Joseph Smith was also interested in the second coming of Jesus Christ. So much so, that he tried to peg Christ’s return to a particular year – 1891. Smith said, “It is the will of the Lord that those who went to Zion, with a determination to lay down their lives, if necessary, should be ordained to the ministry, and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, or the coming of the Lord, which was night – even fifty-six years, should wind up the scene.” (The History of the Church, vol II, page 182). Zion here refers to Jackson County, Missouri – not to Israel. Given the context in which this was said, the fifty-six year time frame would place the return of Jesus on or before February 14, 1891. Many Mormon periodicals demonstrated that zealous Mormons were anxiously awaiting the fulfillment of that prophecy. February 14, 1891 came and went with no second coming. It was truly a disappointing Valentine’s Day for many faithful Mormons.

The History of the Church is not doctrine, it's not scripture, so therefore it shouldn't be used as a source when debating doctrine in the Church.

The specific place for Zion is not mentioned in the Bible, so therefore, there is no contradiction in the Bible. The New Jerusalem is not Jerusalem itself. The New Jerusalem is Zion.

He could have very well been specualting about it the return of Christ, or speaking out of a great desire of his for the Saviour to come. He wasn't prophesying. Every one who is a Christian has a great desire for that day, what makes it so wrong that Joseph had that desire and expressed it?