I'm starting this topic to "continue" a conversation started in the Christians vs. Catholics thread. I will include some of the details from there, but the rest are up to anyone new to read up on. I will specifically post the contents of one post, more or less.
We did not baptize Adolf Hitler. That is a lie. After people baptized for Obama's mother, an official release was sent out saying that unless you specifically know the person who's name you are bringing in to do temple work for (not the names that they already have) or they are in your family, you cannot do temple work for them.
We are not barred from being around ex Mormons. We do not necessarily believe they are with Satan. We excommunicate people for their good. In our views, it gives them a second chance. They can rejoin the church later, and their sins will be gone, just as they were when they were first baptized. I know many ex Mormons, and I do not get in trouble for being with them.
South Park is in no way an authority on anything. The fact that you're trying to cite that is pathetic.
Yes, there was polygamy. But it was revoked in the 1890's (even if only for legal reasons). Joseph Smith did not try to burn down a newspaper place. He was taken to jail for no real reason. If he shot back, it was only because they were shooting at him.
The reason non members are not allowed in the temple is because of the sacred things that go on in there. If just anyone was allowed in, the spirit would be disrupted. I will expound on this if needs be.
I am personally ashamed of the acts of other Latter-Day Saints who have done temple work for people without permission from relatives of that person. It is wrong, and we know it.
Tithing... It was actually in Christ's day when it started. The only reason it affects our worthiness to enter the temple (not our standing in general). The Lord gave us everything we have, and all he asks is 10% of what we earn. I'd say that's a pretty small price for life, liberty, and happiness.
Also, we believe in Agency and Accountability. You can choose to do what you want, but you will have to accept the consequences.
I have a testimony of Jesus Christ. He is my savior and my redeemer. I believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and that Thomas S. Monson is the living prophet today. I believe the Bible to be true as far as it is correctly translated. I know that through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, we can be forgiven for our sins and return to live with our Heavenly Father. I have seen the Atonement in action in my life. I know that God listens to all prayers to him. He answers them in his own way. I know that I can make it to the Celestial Kingdom if I but do my best to keep the commandments of God.
@CommanderDude7: Your post got almost got lost there! More than half of Mormons live outside the U.S. I'm not sure of the exact percentage. Utah is between 50 and 60 percent LDS, although I think that might be a bit outdated. The gospel is more easily accepted in Latin American countries, and is accepted by very few in many European countries. That's about all I know off the top of my head.
@E1337: That's why I added D&C 101:75. Mormons never believed slavery was right. Exodus and Leviticus, while still scripture, are from Moses's time. As I remember, Jesus marked the end of most things from that time. When he told slaves to obey their masters, he wasn't saying "go get slaves." It was more about humility than slavery.
The same thing goes for the stoning. Take the example of the woman taken in adultery. I don't remember the exact wording of what Jesus said, but he more or less said "Let him who is perfect among you cast the first stone." That pretty much marked the end of stoning.
It also seems that the second through fifth books of the Old Testament were the ones I paid the least amount of attention to in Seminary. Which means I have some studying to do -.-
I can personally attest to the fact that oral sodomy is very pleasurable and **** sodomy even more so, however, like most sex acts, hygiene is important.
Why did God make it this way? Did he make rules so they could be broken, and he could punish people or ransom their souls in exchange for repentance?
Better question, why did God make **** sex so freaking amazing? Why did he make the prostate gland feel ever so pleasurable to be touched?
Perhaps many aspects of the Bible should not be taken literally, like the idea that the Earth is 8000 years old (as it takes a molten rock much more time to cool to livable conditions), but doesn't this refute the idea of the Bible, as an imperfect book is expected to enlighten us about a perfect being.
Better question, why did God make **** sex so freaking amazing? Why did he make the prostate gland feel ever so pleasurable to be touched?
Well if God really wanted us to require marriage he could have made it so that sex wouldn't feel good until after being married. the ceremony could induce a physiological change so that one desires sex or to make it so that sex is then pleasurable.
Also whats with this totally mismatched production of sperm to egg. I woman has up to 60,000 eggs, while a man will produce roughly 85,000,000 sperm per testicle per day.
Linktopast30 wrote: Many other discrepancies/contradictions aren't really there. One example is the Word of Wisdom. There was never doctrine before saying that you should partake of these things, nor was there doctrine against it. Therefore, God did not contradict himself when giving the Word of Wisdom. In other words, they are stating something that was never stated before in other doctrine (I hope this makes sense).
I understand what you are saying here, but that doesn't apply to my previous contradiction in what Book of Mormon reads and what Joseph Smith said.
Linktopast30 wrote: I'm trying to think of other contradictions that have been pointed out before, and I'm drawing a blank. Could you perhaps post another example?
Alright, this one is about children's spirits.
But as the child dies, so shall it rise from the dead...It will never grow: it will still be the child, in the same precise form as it appeared before it died out of its mother's arms...Eternity is full of thrones, upon which dwell thousands of children reigning on thrones of glory, will not one cubit added to their stature. â"Joseph Smith in Journal of Discourse
Later you have the complete opposite notion in the Gospel Doctrines. Here is the exert:
All spirits are in adult form. They were adults before their mortal existence, and they are in adult form after death, even if they die as infants or children. - Gospel Doctrine, pg. 454
Linktopast30 wrote: I do see your point, though. I think I see more contradictions in the world of non-religion than I do in religion itself, though. You don't have to think very hard to see where those contradictions lie.
Well, sure there are, in a way. Which makes them less credible and I do not follow that school of that. Later, when Mage asked you to provide some examples, you did. About the government and the media. I agree with you that those are two examples of organizations that provided biased, contradiction, and sometimes completely wrong information. Again, this is why I would not trust either one of these organizations or groups.
When I read the news, I take it with a grain of salt. When the government tells me a plane his the pentagon and there is no debris, I question the credibility and truth.
So, that is my point. When you follow a school of thought (Mormonism, for example) and it contains contradictions, stretched evidence, sometimes absurd moral values, and etc., how do you contain to put faith with them? What drives you to keep going on the same path?
Personally, I hold a bunch of ideas in my pocket. They sometimes change from week to week.
You misunderstand what I mean by virgin birth. It is possible to impregnant a woman without breaking the hymen. Sperm can pass through the hymen and travel into the uterus.
Hmm, you said that Christians have "archaeological proof" then used virgin birth as an example. It's ok to admit being mistaken.
The truth is, gays don't want to get married in a church, we just want to get married.
Then why was Proposition 8 propositioned in the first place? My personal belief is that you should be allowed to get married if that is your wish, because you have your choice on how you want to live your life. But there's no reason a private organization should be forced to marry you, that would be going against separation of church and state and freedom of religion. E1337, I don't want to assume, but from the statements you've made and the pattern of misinformation you've shared it sounds like you go off of what people tell you rather than reading up on things yourself. IF that's the case, you should read in detail what Prop 8 was, then read the linked articles that Linktopast30 gave you, and THEN comment on what you've read. If that's not the case, then I apologize.
Also, all this talk on the Old Testament doesn't apply to modern-day Christianity/Mormonism, because like Linktopast30 said that was Moses' time. Slavery, Eye for an eye, taking only a certain amount of steps on the Sabbath, burnt offerings... Christ came and changed the law. If you have any beef with Old Testament, talk to the Jews. When Christ spoke of slaves listening to their masters, he wasn't condoning slavery. He was telling them how to conduct themselves, in a Christ-like way. The story of Joseph and the coat of many colors is an example of that. Even though Joseph's brothers were ****** bags and sold him into slavery, he conducted himself in a way that caught the eye of his master, and he became very successful and was trusted. That's all.
Then why was Proposition 8 propositioned in the first place?
It's the right to marry, not the right to marry in a church. I do not think that a religious organization should donate funds or steer it's congregation politically. If LDS wants to believe and enforce certain things on their own playing field and watch, then so be it. But stay out of non-Mormons' business, ya know?
LDS read this letter to the church:
Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families
In March 2000 California voters overwhelmingly approved a state law providing that âOnly marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.â The California Supreme Court recently reversed this vote of the people. On November 4, 2 008, Californians will vote on a proposed amendment to the California state constitution that will now restore the March 2000 definition of marriage approved by the voters.
The Churchâs teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creatorâs plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.
A broad-based coalition of churches and other organizations placed the proposed amendment on the ballot. The Church will participate with this coalition in seeking its passage. Local Church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved in this important cause.
We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage. Source
The truth is, gays don't want to get married in a church, we just want to get married.
i've never been more lost on a thread.... so i'll just acknowledge a false statement I saw.
you may be gay... you may be atheist... you may want to get married... but not necessarily in a church.
however that does not mean that all gays/homosexuals are the same as you. There are gays out there that say they subscribe to Christianity... if anyone of those gay people would like to get married in the church they are a part of then your statement is false.
But as the child dies, so shall it rise from the dead...It will never grow: it will still be the child, in the same precise form as it appeared before it died out of its mother's arms...Eternity is full of thrones, upon which dwell thousands of children reigning on thrones of glory, will not one cubit added to their stature. "Joseph Smith in Journal of Discourse
Any idea how much that would totally suck for some kids?
The truth is, gays don't want to get married in a church, we just want to get married.
Actually some do want to get married in the church of the religion they follow. Though considering that religion doesn't accept them it makes one wonder why they follow it.
I never said the old testament laws do not apply, or that the LDS church does not believe the Old Testament. I simply said that many of the laws from Moses's time were changed or overruled during Christ's ministry.
I'm ignoring most of those posts, as they do not contribute much to this discussion. The only one that I really got much value out of was one of Einfach's, and I will answer his question in a later post (this one is already huge). I will proceed with answering the posts on page 25.
@Asherlee: Thank you for providing an instance of contradiction. Perhaps I can provide some clarification on that one, though. Spirits are very different from physical bodies, and those two passages are talking about different things. The Joseph Smith quote is referring to the physical body, specifically after resurrection. The quote from Gospel Doctrines is referring to the spirit, which is the part of you that moves on when you die. Therefore, there is no contradiction there. As for that Joseph Smith quote conflicting with other things I've learned, I'll have to get back to you on that, because I think there are conflicts there.
Now, at the resurrection (the Second Coming), our spirits will be reunited with our bodies, which will be returned to a perfect state. Any children born after the resurrection will have mortal bodies and live for 100 years, at the end of which they will be translated (I think that's the word for it - I'm currently looking for the reference) in the twinkling of an eye to an immortal state. Now, the obvious thought is "they're going to live as old people forever?" They will be old, but only by current standards. The immortal body, I'd imagine, will not look like the body of an old man or woman.
Moving on to your second post (ugh, my post is getting long!). That letter was read in every meetinghouse. The reason we fought so hard is partially because of what I'm about to explain. If Proposition 8 had not passed, it would have set precedent for other states to pass laws that could essentially force churches to marry gays. This is part of the issue I explained earlier, just under a slightly different light. Also, the main purpose of that letter was to increase awareness and to state where we stood on the matter. Imagine the worst-case scenario: even with all the campaigning by other churches (which wasn't that much, but still existed), a majority votes NO. The LDS Church members alone would probably not be enough to make the law pass. This is assuming that everyone who is eligible to vote does vote (which I know NEVER happens). It was that big of a deal.
I'm going to stop here and post what I have. I'll answer more questions later.
Perhaps I can provide some clarification on that one, though. Spirits are very different from physical bodies, and those two passages are talking about different things. The Joseph Smith quote is referring to the physical body, specifically after resurrection.
Sure sounds like he's talking about the spirit to me, considering he's talking about the world of the spirits when the question was raised.
I have a father, brothers, children, and friends who have gone to a world of spirits. They are only absent for a moment. They are in the spirit, and we shall soon meet again. The time will soon arrive when the trumpet shall sound. When we depart, we shall hail our mothers, fathers, friends, and all whom we love who have fallen asleep in Jesus. There will be no fear of mobs, persecutions, or malicious law-suits and arrests; but it will be an eternity of felicity. JD 6:10, Joseph Smith, April 6, 1844 A question may be asked - "Will mothers have their children in eternity?" Yes! yes! Mothers, you shall have your children; for they shall have eternal life; for their debt is paid. There is no ****ation awaits them, for they are in the spirit. But as the child dies, so shall it rise from the dead, and be for ever living in the learning of God. It will never grow: it will still be the child, in the same precise form as it appeared before it died out of its mother's arms, but possessing all the intelligence of a God. Children dwell in the mansions of glory and exercise power, but appear in the same form as when on earth. Eternity is full of thrones, upon which dwell thousands of children reigning on thrones of glory, with not one cubit added to their stature.
@E1337: You can continue believing what you want - I don't care. I especially don't care when you change my words against me, trying to say I said flat out that our church does not believe in the Old Testament. I have a feeling that you know you're wrong, and you are now just desperately grasping at straws, trying anything that could discredit me.
@Einfach: The power of procreation is a sacred power, meant to be used by a man and a woman in the bonds of marriage. For the same reason we stand against masturbation and fornication, we stand against sodomy. I know I don't need to explain masturbation and fornication to you. Both are a misuse of the power God has given us. Sodomy is no different in that sense.
@MageGrayWolf: I'm sorry to tell you that 4mormon.org is an anti-Mormon website designed to lead astray anyone wanting to find out more about us. I looked around it, and much of it was crafted out of lies with enough truth to make it look legitimate. In fact, that is the best way to deceive someone if you're going to go about doing so. Combine it with a little bit of flattery, and you probably have a rough formula of what Satan uses every day to deceive people.
I see where your confusion lies, and I hope I can clear some of that up in this post. Joseph Smith is talking about the state of the children after the resurrection, when the spirit and body shall reunite. When he says "There is no ****ation awaits them, for they are in the spirit," he means that they will not be sent to Spirit Prison (more on that later), but rather to Spirit Paradise, between now and the Second Coming. Upon resurrection, they will be children again, just as I would be an 18-year-old if I were to die today.
I think it's time for me to explain the plan of salvation. To do so, I will need my scriptures handy for reference, so I will not do so in this particular post (I am currently at work). I want to be as accurate and clear as possible when I speak on this subject, which is why I'm waiting. Expect it soon, though.
