Mormonism: The 4th Abrahamic Religion?

Gr8tgary38 »

Sat Jan 10, 2009 3:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Both religions(even though Mormons are under the Christian umbrella) have additional books to explain cultural and theological views. A real Christian doesn't need any other book to exlain what Godentends for them to do.

Gr8tgary38 »

Sat Jan 10, 2009 3:40 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Some very interesting points, here is another point, in Matthew 24:24, "For false christs and false prophets will arise and show great signsand wondeers to deceive if possible even the elect. Mr. Josesph Smith and Mr. Muhammad ibn Abdullah seem to fit the perfect deceptive prohet.

Daniel Paul »

Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:08 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

There is a book called The Changing World of Mormonism that has photos of the 3 printings of the Book of Mormon. Complete pages have been added and/or deleted from the original. So,

Was the Book of Mormon not translated perfectly and has no errors in the first printing which would leave the current version full of errors

-or-

Was the first printing full of errors which needed correcting and thus the entire religion comes from a false precept?

My favorite is the doctrine of Adam/God which says that Adam progressed to become a god, went to bed with the virgin Mary and came up with the body of Jesus the Christ which was possessed by the spirit of Jesus the Christ (child of God and Mrs. God in heaven) at the baptism of John. The church had a pamphlet on this doctrine which I believe I still have in storage.

Harry4Health »

Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

PT 1-Hesadanza & all:
1) The Bible says we are all children of God as far as creation- "Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?" (Mal 2:10). That's a Hebrew parallelism- second part repeating the first a little differently. The ONLY way one can be a child of God in any other sense besides a common physical creation is by personal faith in Jesus- Jn 1:12.
2) Isa 14:12 does not say Lucifer rejected the Father's plan. That is from LDS scriptures, not the Bible.
3) The LDS Church redefines what the words you use for Jesus mean. SON OF GOD means one of billions of spirit children of Heavenly Father & Heavenly Mother (a God & Goddess), and Lucifer/Satan is spirit brother to Jesus. Jesus was not begotten of the Holy Ghost, but of the Father in the same, literal sense that all humans are begotten of their parents. Yes literal & real. SAVIOR & REDEEMER means he died to give resurrection free, but individual salvation has faith & works, and salvation in the celestial kingdom ('heaven') is earned with some becoming angels and others becoming gods & goddesses, as the Father became a God. The Book of Mormon says "We know that it is by grace that we are saved, AFTER *ALL* we CAN do." Eph 2:8-9 says by grace we are/have been saved without works so none can boast. ATONER is in the context of the above, plus that Jesus did not atone/pay for sin solely on the cross, as the Bible teaches (1 Cor 15:1-5, Rom 5, Col 1,etc), but it started in Gethsemane and finished on the cross. THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH means only the LDS Church (D&C 1:30;115:4, Ensign 12/1989, p 51), the LDS Jesus being the only name to be saved by is in the context of works system of salvation, and the LDS Church being the sole source for individual salvation.

Harry4Health »

Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

PART 2-Hesadanza & all:
4) The Book of Mormon does not say that Jesus and J Smith determines who gets into heaven, but LDS prophet, Brigham Young did: "... no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith.... Every man and woman MUST have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are ... I CANNOT go there without his consent.... He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven (JOD vol. 7:289) and "I will now give MY SCRIPTURE—"Whosoever confesseth that Joseph Smith was sent of God ... that spirit is of God; and every spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of *Anti-christ* ... (vol. 8:176)". You said "We also have modern revelation from God through living prophets and apostles", and BY said he gave scripture here, twisting Romans 10:9 by adding Smith to Jesus as requirement. JS stands between us & salvation in 'God's presence'- a mediator, in effect. NT says "ONE mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5).
5) The testimony link you gave is typical LDS approach- U avoid the real differences. It isn't what LDS say so many times, but what they leave out that is crucial: that Father, Son & HG are 3 separate Gods, we can become literal gods, LDS salvation, gospel, Godhead are different, & a lot more. The NT says in 2 Cor 11:3-4,13-15 Gal 1:6-9 that there's a different Jesus/spirit/gospel, and those who preach them are servants of Satan. That's heavy, but it is what Paul said. LDS Church states there are many gods (Abraham 3-5, D&C 132,etc) & works added to salvation. Polytheism isn't an Abrahamic religion, but paganism teaches many gods.
The LDS Church, in effect has the LDS Church & JS as the way to salvation, placed as the mediators between God & man. This is not Christianity.

Hesadanza »

Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:13 am Agree: 5   Disagree: 3

Yes, Jesus Christ is the only Son of God, with a capital S. That is because he is the Savior, Redeemer, Atoner, the Supreme Judge, the head of the Church, and the only name under heaven whereby a man may be saved in the kingdom of God.

But that does not exclude the rest of us as children of our heavenly father. The Bible tells us over and over again that we are "sons of God", "children of the Most High", "offspring of God", and "heirs of God." These are not just figurative, but very literal and real statements of our relationship with God. We believe the prophets and apostles when they speak. We also have modern revelation from God through living prophets and apostles that teaches us this sublime truth.

Yes, we are all brothers - You and I, and everyone that has lived upon this earth, and even the third of the host of heaven that was cast out with Lucifer for rebellion against the Father. Satan thought that he would agrandize himself and take the glory of the Father. He rejected the Father's plan and fell. Yes, he was a choice son, a "son of the morning", and rebelled and was cast out (Isaiah 14:12).

We do teach that there is a hell - it is called outer darkness, where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

The Book of Mormon does not say that only Jesus and Joseph Smith determine who gets into heaven. Sorry. That is misinformation.

Yes, we do believe that God has revealed more book of scripture. It is called the Book of Mormon. And if God reveals more, we will accept it.

We do not equate Jesus with Satan. That is misinformation.

We believe in the literal, real resurrection of Jesus Christ.

We do believe that there are ordinances that Christ established in His Church that must be done to gain salvation. It is for that reason that he established commandments. "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

We do not impose our view militarily. On the contrary, we allow all men to worship God, "how, where, or what they may" (AoF 11).

Yes, I am a Mormon. I am a Latter-day Saint of the Church of Jesus Christ. Christ leads the church today through revelation to living prophets and apostles. To those that question our Christianity, please read the testimony of one of his living apostles:
http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-775-15,00.html

docstarr »

Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:29 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

Odd that so many make statements about the Book of Mormon or about its message of Jesus Christ that are so far from what it really teaches. Here is a simple quote from the Book of Mormon about Salvation and its relationship to Jesus Christ (all quotes from the 1908 edition of the Book of Mormon published by the Community of Christ, Independence, Missouri):

[Mos 1:116] And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given, nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.

That does seem sort of clear, doesn't it? And what is the Doctrine of Jesus Christ. Here again in simple words from Jesus himself from the Book of Mormon:

[3 Ne 5:32] Behold, verily, verily I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine. And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me;
[3 Ne 5:33] And I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me, and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me;
[3 Ne 5:34] And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.
[3 Ne 5:35] And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned.
[3 Ne 5:36] Verily, verily I say unto you, that this is my doctrine; and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me, believeth in the Father also;
[3 Ne 5:37] And unto him will the Father bear record of me; for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost;
[3 Ne 5:38] And thus will the Father bear record of me; and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost, are one.

Pretty clear isn't it. So why do so many Christians feel compelled to lie about the message of the Book of Mormon?

ashleychan »

Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:41 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

I agree with you JC. I don't see how mormans can pretend to be biblical christians, when half of their beliefs conflict with the OT and NT. Traditional biblical Christians would be thought of as Protestants and Catholics, or the branches off of catholicism like Anglican or Calvinist. They follow the OT and NT , even if they do it in different ways. With Mormanism, you have a completely new book that contradicts the main Christian doctrines. It's kinda silly... really

JC »

Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:45 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 3

To Hesadanza:

A true Mormon believes that satan and Jesus were brothers, and that after a committee meeting, Jesus won the election as savior to the Earth. According to Mormon doctrine, this is why satan is mad and is tormenting the world. A sore loser apparently. True Mormonism also teaches there is no Hell, only different levels of Heaven. They have the "Celestial" Heaven, reserved for gods (yes plural). They have the "Terrestrial", which is halfway, or for Mormons who were not baptized in a Mormon temple. And, finally, "Telestial", for those who never believed at all. And, what I feel the most blatant of all, is that the Book of Mormon said that it is up to Jesus AND Joseph Smith on who gets into Heaven.

However, these teachings are at opposition to what the Word of God teaches. Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. There are no others. Jesus had no brothers. There is a Hell, as Jesus spoke of weeping and gnashing of teeth. There is only one God, Jesus said that no man come to the Father but by Him. Jesus did not teach that we will become gods.

A cult, by definition, is a distortion of Biblical Christianity. In Christian Theology, it is taught that it takes acceptance of only 1 of 5 things to define a cult. Some cults meet more than 1.

1. Alternate book. A cult has a problem with the Word of God, and therefore has to have an alternate book. (I.e. Book of Mormon, Jehovah Witness, Quran, etc.)
2. Deity of Christ. A cult has a problem with the deity of Christ. In the case of Mormon, they believe him to not be the only Son of God, and equate Him with satan.
3. The Resurrection. This is obvious. Many religions don't accept this.
4. Salvation by Grace. This is also obvious, as many religions are about works.
5. Militancy. A cult would attempt to impose it's view militarily.

It only takes an acceptance of one of these to be defined as a cult. Incidentally, there is only one religion that meets all 5 criteria, can you guess which one? If you guessed Islam, you guessed absolutely correct.

So, beloved, with all of this being said, I ask you now: Are you a true Mormon?

Prophet »

Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:17 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Hesadanza--
Do you believe that Jesus is the ONLY Son of God?

Hesadanza »

Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:45 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

I'm a Mormon, and I am Christian. Here is one of our hymns:

I Believe in Christ
Hymns, I Believe in Christ, no. 134

1. I believe in Christ; he is my King!
With all my heart to him I’ll sing;
I’ll raise my voice in praise and joy,
In grand amens my tongue employ.
I believe in Christ; he is God’s Son.
On earth to dwell his soul did come.
He healed the sick; the dead he raised.
Good works were his; his name be praised.

2. I believe in Christ; oh blessed name!
As Mary’s Son he came to reign
’Mid mortal men, his earthly kin,
To save them from the woes of sin.
I believe in Christ, who marked the path,
Who did gain all his Father hath,
Who said to men: “Come, follow me,
That ye, my friends, with God may be.”

3. I believe in Christ—my Lord, my God!
My feet he plants on gospel sod.
I’ll worship him with all my might;
He is the source of truth and light.
I believe in Christ; he ransoms me.
From Satan’s grasp he sets me free,
And I shall live with joy and love
In his eternal courts above.

4. I believe in Christ; he stands supreme!
From him I’ll gain my fondest dream;
And while I strive through grief and pain,
His voice is heard: “Ye shall obtain.”
I believe in Christ; so come what may,
With him I’ll stand in that great day
When on this earth he comes again
To rule among the sons of men.

Text: Bruce R. McConkie, 1915–1985. © 1972 IRI
Music: John Longhurst, b. 1940. © 1985 IRI

DanP »

Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:34 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

I am severely skeptical (to say the least) about Mormonism, but I for one am fully prepared to leave the matter to Jesus (see Matt 7:21). But I was very disappointed to see the disingenuousness of Richard Land is quoting some poll that says "more than half – do not believe that Mormonism is an orthodox, Trinitarian, Apostolic, traditional Christian faith.” Nice try, Dr. Land, but Mormons themselves do not claim to be "orthodox" (where is that in the bible?), "Trinitarian" (there are other unitarian Christians, genius), or "traditional" (didn't the Pharisees have traditions?).

Here's the thing about the SBC: it's shrinking and it's panicking.

There are now more Jehovah's Witnesses than SBC. There are now more Adventists than SBC. Within the decade there will be more Mormons than SBC. Apparently the Southern Baptist Convention feels as the speaker did at John 11:48.

zenodaddy »

Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

I guess CP needs to ban her new identity as well... Dannygirl... speaking of two-faced hypocrites...

WiccanTexan »

Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:11 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

ashleychan, agreed. I have no problem with a candidate being a public religious person. But I have a big problem with it being a vote-mongering aspect of their campaign.

ashleychan »

Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:46 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 2

I find that the whole idea of presidents wearing their religion on their shirtsleeves is disgusting. No president should have to pass a religious test to be elected. The president doesn't represent just the Christians- he represents everyone. That means the Muslims, Buddhists, New Agers, and yes, the Atheists too. This means that the government should be kept neutral- not respecting one religion over another. This helps everyone who is religious not be oppressed by another religion(or religious sect), and protects those with no religion at all. Also, I find the religious pandering by the candidates to be incredibly insincere. They are doing it to get votes, not to praise their God. Even the republicans, who are generally very religious, seem to be faking it a bit. Also, I will say this: Is it me, or is Mitt Romney kinda spooky? He weirds me out a bit

jc4me »

Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:36 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

Excerpt taken from a commentary by Roger Oakland named The Inclusive Gospel from www.understandthetimes.org

".............The new evangelization program being promoted by the emerging church, while it may be in the name of Christ, is antichrist. A formula has been established to provide a bridge that has the potential to unite all religious beliefs in the name of Christ, by circumventing the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In the future we will see all faiths join together based on a common mystical experience accompanied by “lying signs and wonders”. The apostasy the Bible warned would be apparent in the Last Days is now fully underway. Only those who hold firm to God’s Word will be protected and delivered. This remnant of faithful believers will be viewed as old-fashioned narrow-minded holdouts who are a hindrance to the establishment of the “kingdom.” As Paul wrote to Timothy, in the Last Days:

Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. [15]"


[15] 2 Timothy 3: 12-13

big german »

Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:51 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

I think that we're all missing the main point of what this article is about.This article is all about how Dr.Land and the SBC will subtley do whatever is necessary to exert their political agenda on America.Even though Dr.land says that he does not believe that salvation can be found in mormonism,the fact that he would state that they might be Abrahamic in origin,he gives cover to not just mormons but all cults that lay claim to being a different form of christianity.Christian Scientist,Jehova Witnesses.Even Rastafareans ,who believe that the man they see as their, messiah(Halai Salasi,former african dictator)is the second coming of Jesus.While Dr.Land will publicly states that he doesn't endorse candidates actions such as these give hints and show that these days the leadership of the SBC put being a consertive as more important than being christian.

halliwell3 »

Sun Oct 28, 2007 10:38 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 6

I agree that mormanism is a false religion and i will never support any religioun that has more controll over money and business like the Morman and Catholic church,and has its own mafia and murderous organizations, such as the Morman Mafia and the Jezuits in the Antichrist Catholic church. Just wait till the Morman and Catholic church unite together.

Prophet »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Dannygirl-

It seems that you and I share the same view on compromise. There is none in the Word of God. The Word of God is infallible. And it is the Truth. It is the only truth we need to live this life the way He asks us. Humanists, Wiccans, New Age Spiritualists, etc will all twist the Word to use for their purpose. And then they'll accuse us of doing the same thing. I don't twist the Word to fit my agenda. God says not to lie....it is my nature to do so, so to not lie is not my agenda. God says not to fornicate...but that's my nature, so to refrain from that is not my agenda. The only agenda I am promoting is God's. I, by nature, do not want to live holy. But it is no longer what I want...it's what God wants. But then...I'm preaching to the choir.
Yes, continue to refuse to compromise. But also continue to act and speak in love. I will check out your sight, too.

Citizen »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:38 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

dannygirlagain: as an openly Humanist poster, i can tell you that I have seen nobody who sounds like a Humanist while calling themself a Christian. Including zenodaddy. Take it from one who knows.

JC »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:06 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

To dannygirlagain:

Dear one, be encouraged by what Jesus said:

John 15: 18 and 19:
18: "If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you."
19 "If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you."

Dear one, you continue to not compromise. There are wolves in sheep clothing, and they can twist the truth just enough so as to deceive, "Did God really say...".

This is why God wants us to learn who He is, so that we are not deceived. He wants us to walk with our hearts and our eyes wide open.

JC »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:29 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

To Prophet:

Dear one, you are so very welcome. But as you, I am just the messenger. (You already know this, but as I have found many times, who we think our target audience is, sometimes isn't).

And yes, Luke was a physician. An educated man. The perfect one to write to the intellectual thinkers of the day. They would accept the word of a physician as one that has good mental capacity, and would examine the facts thoroughly before drawing any conclusions.

Prophet »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:27 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Danny,

If you want to know a little more about what I stand for, check out my site:

www.isaiahscry.blogspot.com

And make sure you check out the previous posts thar are listed on the left hand side.

holito8 »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:26 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Dear one, if you didn't remove the roof, all you would see would be the top of a tent. I meant an examination of the contents of the structure, not the structure itself. The structure itself was just a large, mobile, tent. But the internal layout is significant.

Yes, you are correct. If someone did not read correctly, they would miss the book of Exodus. I think in my recollection where God gave explicit detail on tabernacle... more importantly the inside.

JC »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:58 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

To Holito8:

Dear one, if you didn't remove the roof, all you would see would be the top of a tent. I meant an examination of the contents of the structure, not the structure itself. The structure itself was just a large, mobile, tent. But the internal layout is significant.

Dear one, everything in the Old Testament points to Jesus. Everything in the New Testament points to Jesus. If one puts these two testaments together you can really see the direction it is pointing.

If one reads the Bible for purely academic knowledge, than that is exactly what they have, academic knowledge. But, dear one, one can have all the academic knowledge they can fit into their brains, but still lack understanding and wisdom. Some people can quote the Bible word for word, and still miss the entire point.

Some of the Pharisees, or priests of the Temple, completely missed Him when He was in front of them. They had memorized the scripture inside and out, all their lives, and still missed it. Yet, he was standing in front of them, performing acts that no human could do. But, they lacked understanding and wisdom.

Prophet »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:55 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

JC

Thanks for the clarification. I knew that Luke was a Gentile (a physician, if I am correct). And I knew that Mark wasn't a disciple but that he was among few who had close, personal contact with Jesus and His disciples. I'm sorry for not making that clear. Sometimes my fingers get ahead of my head. And I, too, think that the Jews were probably miffed by the idea of Luke writing a Gospel. But that was God's way of tying His message of salvation in with the Gentiles too. To show that salvation wan't just for the Jews.
The information about the different Gospels is awesome! I knew that about Luke and John, but didn't realize what Mark and Matthew was about. I'll have to put that in my notes for future use. Thank you so much for your wisdom.
Yes, we will worship our Lord together someday. What a day it will be! I may never know your name or see your face, but our spirits bear witness that we are His. And being His, we are brothers.

JC »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:42 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Hey Prophet:

May God continue to richly bless you!

Just for clarification, only two of the four gospels were written by the original 12 apostles. Matthew and John. Mark was not one of the original 12, but he was among them. He most likely witnessed some of Jesus' miracles. There is evidence in Mark, that he was actually in the Garden when Jesus was arrested, as the writer references himself. Mark, a very dear friend of Peter, wrote this while either in Greece or Rome while traveling with Peter. Some scholars believe Rome. But, because he was a dear friend and companion of of Peter, some believe that you could actually call this the Gospel of Peter.

Luke, was also not one of the orginal twelve. Luke was also the only Gentile writer in the New Testament. He is responsible for almost 42% of the New Testament, both the Gospel of Luke, and Acts. This must really irk the die-hards Jews, as the thought of a Gentile talking about their Messiah, even if they don't believe He is the Messiah, and then having it added on to their book.

Prophet, you most likely already know this, but others may not, so I will give this too:

Gospel of Matthew - Written specifically for the Jews. It bridges the gap between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Most scholars believe it was actually the second book to be written, following Mark. But this is uncomfirmed. Some also believe that Matthew specifically laid the book out in the same format as the Pentateuch, or Torah (The first five books of the Old Testament).

Gospel of Mark - Written specifically for the Romans. It does not cover much jewish law as Matthew, as this would make entirely no sense to a Roman. But it appealled to their strong and warrior-like thinking. Jesus was a mover and a shaker, but also one who came to serve.

Gospel of Luke - Written specifically for the Greeks. The greeks were the intellectual thinkers of the day. Luke did an exhaustive investigation of these events, including eyewitnesses. This book is the longest of the Gospels, and talks about everything an intellectual thinker of the day would need for reasoning. Paul when talking to the Grecians, talked about their gods, and that they had so many gods, they even had one for "an unknown god". You will find this Acts.

Gospel of John - Written specifically for the Church. John's sole desire in writing this book was to prove that Jesus is who He said He is. He references miracles that display Jesus' power of all the elements man has no control of whatsoever.


Prophet, dear one, keep running the race. You and I will stand in His presence and worship Him together. I look forward to this very much. See you there!!

Prophet »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:27 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Danny--

Is there something I said that made you think that I do not speak God's Word? If there is, then let me know. I would like to go back and review it and see if I had mispoken. It is my earnest desire to speak the Truth in all things. But, as my wife points out, sometimes what I am trying to say, and what actually comes out are two different thiings. hahaha.

holito8 »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:02 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Should read: "Moses' instructions to build the tabernacle, were not just hap-hazard instructions. If you were to actually recreate the tabernacle, REMOVE THE ROOF, and then take an aerial view, you would see it has formed a cross. Coincidence? I think not, look at where the Holy of Holies is located within the tabernacle."

Thanks JC for your hairsplittig correction. Many people would have failed to remove the top of the temple and look therein. Keep them coming. I feeling more enlighten every minute.

Prophet »

Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:57 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Dannygirl,

I am me. And I do speak the Word of the Lord.

JC »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Sorry, correction:

"Moses' instructions to build the tabernacle, were not just hap-hazard instructions. If you were to actually recreate the tabernacle, and then take an aerial view, you would see it has formed a cross. Coincidence? I think not, look at where the Holy of Holies is located within the tabernacle."

Should read: "Moses' instructions to build the tabernacle, were not just hap-hazard instructions. If you were to actually recreate the tabernacle, REMOVE THE ROOF, and then take an aerial view, you would see it has formed a cross. Coincidence? I think not, look at where the Holy of Holies is located within the tabernacle."

JC »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 10:09 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

HampsteadPete:

Dear one, you really should do you research before posting.

Your information sounds as if you have been listening to somebody else, and not doing research for yourself. Please don't let others decide where you spend eternity, look for yourself and see.

These first 5 books speak a great deal of Jesus. Was Moses' in Babylonian captivity? If you answered "No", you are correct.

Let's look at Genesis: We know that God walked around in the Garden with Adam and Eve. Now, since man cannot look upon the face of God, who were they walking and talking with? Jesus of course. When God spoke to the serpent and said that from Eve, shall come one that will crush his head? Jesus of course. This was at least 2500 years before Egypt was even a nation.

Moses' instructions to build the tabernacle, were not just hap-hazard instructions. If you were to actually recreate the tabernacle, and then take an aerial view, you would see it has formed a cross. Coincidence? I think not, look at where the Holy of Holies is located within the tabernacle.

You may also want to look at history in the 20th century as well. In 1948, a little strip of land was given to the Jewish population by the United Nations, and the inhabitants called it Israel. Now, in antiquity, it was prophesied that Israel would again become a nation. Nobody believed it. For 2500 years nobody believed this prophesy would ever come true. But look now.

The information about Paul is not only incorrect, it is absurd. Dear one, read it for yourself, for there is far more there than what I am about to show you.

The very beginning of the letter Paul wrote to the Romans:

Chapter 1, starting at verse 1 -
1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
2 which he promised afore through his prophets in the holy scriptures,
3 concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh,
4 who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord,
5 through whom we received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all the nations, for his name's sake

The very beginning of the letter Paul wrote to the Corinthians:

Chapter 1, starting at verse 1:
1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 unto the church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and ours:
3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.


Dear one, I encourage you to look for yourself. Don't take anybody else's word for it, look for yourself. God loves you and wants you to know the truth. He is not going to make getting to know Him very difficult, we do that ourselves. Please, take a look.

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:39 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 0

gar--
Study! Study! Study! I percieve that you have gotten your view from hearing some tidbit of information from somwhere, without hearing the whole picture. Study to see what the Bible says about the roles of husband and wife. True, the Bible does say that the wife should submit to the husband, but only an ignorant person would believe that means that a husband has the right to be a tyrant over his wife. Ephesians 5:25 tells the husband to love his wife even as Jesus loved the church. How did He love the church? He gave his life for it! (which it says in that same scripture) Does that sound like a selfish tyrant? I didn't think so. I know a billion women who would love to have a husband that loves them enough to give his life, both in death and in servitude (don't forget that Jesus came as a servant to the church).
Don't be spouting off have baked rhetoric that you overheard from someone else. Read and study the Word. But I sense that you have no intention of doing so. You do not want to, because you want to test us to see if we know the Word. That's very noble of you, but also immature. You are not asking in order to gain an answer, you are asking in order to entrap.

deborah45 »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:31 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Check out Sameul Seawalls biography..He was the guy who burned withches.in Massachuttes. It seems like Joseph Smith had access to his writing concernig the Native Americans, and the US.Could Smith's angel' Morioni ' been Samuel Seawalls writings of old.Samuel claimed to have visions from Tereasa Of Avila about this stuff...

Samuel Seawall helped slavery and the native americans.The Mormans recently changed thier doctrine to say dark skinned people are not cursed anymore! The mormans say you will get another planet to populate and become gods.slander not intended just stating a different Jesus from christianity.Jesus is Satans brother they say,and they fought over who was going to get this planet.Investigate investigate,

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:23 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

But I have faith in my God, and He has proved Himself to me time and time again--literally!
Archaelogists have claimed to have found the remnants of Sodom and Gamorah, as well as Jericho...both of which come looooooooong before the book of Kings.
And I love what you said: "The Christ figure was mostly stolen from Egyptian myth, adapted by Gnostics, and turned into the present myth by writers writing at least a hundred years after the alleged "facts." I hate to tell you this, but the four Gospels were written within a few short years of the events, three of them were from Jesus' own disciples! So much for "hundreds of years after". I would have to say that the part of the Bible that was written the farthest from when Jesus walked the earth was John writing the book of Revelations. And that was probably only like 50 or 60 year after, and that had nothing to do with the history of Jesus.
Paul did speak of Jesus quite often...and he actually met Jesus face to face. He spoke time and time again of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection.
So let me clear this up. In the New Testament....the four Gospels are the history of Jesus' birth, life, death, and resurrection. Acts is the history of the early church. And the rest of the New Testament (excluding Revelations) is teachings that expound (by the Holy Spirit) upon the teachings of Jesus.
And, yes, there are many denominations of Christianity. But the one thing that they hold in common is that there is only one way to heaven...through Jesus Christ. Any other teaching is not of God. And just because they call themselves "Christians" doesn't mean they are. I can call myself a professional football player all I want...it doesn't mean I am one.

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:22 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

I've seen many documentaries about how other cultures have stolen from the Bible and Jewish history. I guess no one can be sure.

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:22 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Wow. Another person who doesn't understand the history of the Bible.
These claims of Christianity "stealing" myths from other cultures....well, I guess it's all in how you slant it.

HampsteadPete »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:57 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

As Carl Sagan once said: "The differences between the abrahamic religions pale before their similarities." Looking in from the outside, after having studied them all, along with their origins in great detail, I can tell you that the differences between them are not only minor but inconsequential as well.

The old testament was largely written during captivity in Babylon, and references many preceding Babylonian myths, such as the flood, etc.. Much else was written to impress their captors. Modern archeology has no support for most of the OT prior to second kings, and little after that.

The Christ figure was mostly stolen from Egyptian myth, adapted by Gnostics, and turned into the present myth by writers writing at least a hundred years after the alleged "facts." The failure of Paul to write about a Christ on earth, or to relate any of the so-called events of the gospels is one of the best proofs of this.

The Mormons merely go one myth farther into inanity then the rest of the Christians, and for that you ostracize and ridicule them, when you should be accepting that they believe many of the same myths you do.

According to the Christian Encyclopedia, there are currently almost 34,000 different sects and denominations of Christianity, each with its own ticket, and each with a slightly different view of something. Again, from the outside, you all look the same.

gar »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 7:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Somehow I could never adure to any religeon where the male ego demands the female to be subject.to him. Also I could never see any god turn it's human creation over to some human wino to create slavery among the humans. I would expect more from a god than that.

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:30 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

I do find it funny that this gentlman lists Islam as one of them. Especially when Islam and Judaism are mortal enemies. The Islamic extremists greatest desire is to completely annihilate the Jews. There's something that makes sense!

Prophet »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 5:25 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

Wiccan--

I gather from your name that you have barely cracked open a Bible, much less studied it. This "religion" as you call it, wasn't created when God gave Moses the ten commandments. It was created when God himself make a pact with Abram (aka Abraham) hundreds of years earlier. And God foretold that this "religion" would encompass Jews as well and Gentiles.
If you're gonna make claims...at least study instead of going off of some story you may have heard in Sunday school or on a 3-hour epic movie starring Charleton Heston.

JC »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:35 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 0

To WiccanTexan:

Moses didn't find the tablets, they were given to him. Twisting just enough truth. "Did God really say...".

To all:

Mormonism started when Joseph Smith got a "Vision" from an "angel" called Moroni. This "angel" told him that the current religion of Christianity was not doing the right things anymore and that he, Joseph Smith, would be the one to deliver how it would be from that point on.

But, if we look at the Word of God, we see what it says about events like these:

From Galations 1, verses 8 & 9:

8: But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

9: As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!


If we compare what Mormonism is about, against the word of God, then we can see that it is not what it appears to be. One must only shed light on the subject to find what it really is, but we must us God's light as it is the most revealing of all.

WiccanTexan »

Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:21 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 9

Moses finds stone tablets via God, it's a religion. Joseph Smith finds gold plates via God, it's a cult.

Wonder how things will be 50 years down the road?