Re: miketpoto

I believe Joseph Smith

Re: miketpoto

wtf does smith say then?

Re: miketpoto

Mike I was not ignoring the Smith thing

I was feeding my children and had to attend services tonight.

I am looking into Smith as I do not know a great deal about him. There is so much information out there about so many people who say this or that. I am only one man and can only decipher information when I take time to look into it. I am not the type of person to scratch the surface of something and be say I understand it. There is a wealth of information on any given subject. Those who we refer to as wise usually are the ones who dig deep into things.

I am interested in knowing more about him so I guess it is good this came up as I just have not made myself look into him yet.

Re: miketpoto

[url]http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html[/url]

Re: miketpoto

To clarify for everyone, Joseph smith is the "prophet" or "inventor" of the mormon church of jesus christ of latter day saints. he claimed to be a "modern day" prophet who brought more of christ's words to the people in the book of mormon. There is a brilliant south park episode that explains the story wonderfully, but here's the gist of it from the PBS website biography.

[QUOTE]Joseph Smith 1805-1844

Born on December 23, 1805, in Sharon, Vermont, to Joseph and Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph Smith Jr. grew up on a series of tenant farms in Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York. Though in his youth Joseph was largely deprived of a formal education, he was "instructed in reading, writing, and the ground rules of arithmetic."1 Joseph's mother said that he was often "given to meditation and deep study."2 Affected by the great religious excitement taking place around his home in Manchester, New York, in 1820, fourteen-year-old Joseph was determined to know which of the many religions he should join. He encountered a passage in the Bible instructing any who lacked wisdom to "ask of God" (James 1:5). Early one morning in the spring of 1820, Joseph went to a secluded woods to ask God which church he should join. According to his account, while praying Joseph was visited by two "personages" who identified themselves as God the Father and Jesus Christ. He was told not to join any of the churches.

In 1823, Joseph Smith said he was visited by an angel named Moroni, who told him of an ancient record containing God's dealings with the former inhabitants of the American continent. In 1827, Joseph retrieved this record, inscribed on thin golden plates, and shortly afterward began translating its words by the "gift of God."3 The resulting manuscript, the Book of Mormon, was published in March 1830. On April 6, 1830, Joseph Smith organized The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and became its first president.

Joseph married Emma Hale on January 18, 1827, and was described as a loving and devoted husband. They had eleven children (two adopted), only five of whom lived past infancy. During the thirty-nine years of his life, Joseph established thriving cities in Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois; produced volumes of scripture; sent missionaries throughout the world; orchestrated the building of temples; served as mayor of Nauvoo, one of the largest cities in Illinois, and as general of its militia, the Nauvoo Legion; and was a candidate for the presidency of the United States. He was a controversial figure in American history—beloved of his followers and hated by his detractors. Joseph was persecuted much of his adult life and was killed along with his brother Hyrum by a mob in Carthage, Illinois, on June 27, 1844.[/QUOTE]

Re: miketpoto

[URL="http://www.exmormon.org/prophet.htm"]and this site elaborates from a very good perspective.... :) [/URL]

Re: miketpoto

are you a mormon shosh?

Re: miketpoto

I think I have read enough already to explain this. I have gone to [URL="http://www.pbs.org"]www.pbs.org[/URL] to read about him. I will paste this from the site.

Affected by the great religious excitement taking place around his home in Manchester, New York, in 1820, fourteen-year-old Joseph was determined to know which of the many religions he should join. He encountered a passage in the Bible instructing any who lacked wisdom to "ask of God" (James 1:5). Early one morning in the spring of 1820, Joseph went to a secluded woods to ask God which church he should join. According to his account, while praying Joseph was visited by two "personages" who identified themselves as God the Father and Jesus Christ. He was told not to join any of the churches. In 1823, Joseph Smith said he was visited by an angel named Moroni, who told him of an ancient record containing God's dealings with the former inhabitants of the American continent. In 1827, Joseph retrieved this record, inscribed on thin golden plates, and shortly afterward began translating its words by the "gift of God."[SIZE=2][COLOR=#000080]3[/COLOR][/SIZE] The resulting manuscript, the [I]Book of Mormon[/I], was published in March 1830. On April 6, 1830, Joseph Smith organized The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and became its first president.

Here is my first thought

"Early one morning in the spring of 1820, Joseph went to a secluded woods to ask God which church he should join."

This seems odd to me. secluded woods, no one there to see if in fact that God and Jesus did come to him. Not credible to anyone who has sense. If there is no one to see this then I can not lend credit to it. All of the accounts of Jesus in the Bible were seen by many people. If I told you that tonight I was visited by God and Jesus in my car on the way to the store to buy some milk, the first thing you would say to me is prove it. No proof no credit.

Here is what the bible says about divine revelation.

The work of the Holy Spirit is three fold - revelation then inspiration then confirmation Revelation means revealing. So if something is revealed where does if come from. That is the inspiration. So if there is a revealing by inspiratin where is the proof. That is in the conformation. You have to have all three to have credit. Joseph Smith claims revelation with inspiration but there is no proof. No one was there with him, where are the gold tablets he was given. No one has seen them ever.

So now we go to the Bible to see about its revelation, inspiration and conformation. 1 Corinthians 2 pretty much the entire chapter is relevant to this as a building into the answer. Here are the main points: 1Co 2:4 And my speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 1Co 2:5 that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

1Co 2:10 But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 1Co 2:11 For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God. 1Co 2:12 But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God; that we might know the things that were freely given to us of God. 1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth; combining spiritual things with spiritual words. 1Co 2:14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. 1Co 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man. 1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, John 14:17 even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive; for it beholdeth him not, neither knoweth him: ye know him; for he abideth with you, and shall be in you.

go to verse 26 to get an explanation of what the comforter is

John 14:26 But the Comforter, [B]even the Holy Spirit[/B], whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you.

the meaning of this verse is pretty clear. It says God will send the Holy Spirit to remind the apostles who are penning the Bible of all that Jesus taught them.

This is Jesus talking to his apostles

Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come.

so in summary the revelation came from God and was given to the apostles by the Holy Spirit as stated in verse 10 where it says "but unto us it was revealed" there you have the revelation, the first step. So here Jesus says that the Holy Spirit will reveal things to come to the apostles some 1860 +/- years before Joseph Smith was a gleam in his parents eye. I am sure that Joseph Smith was not alive when Jesus walked the earth and over 1800 years old when he wrote the book of Mormon.

Now lets look for inspiration for Mr. Smith.

2 Peter 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. 2 Peter 1:21 For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit.

Do not misunderstand the word interpretation as it is used in verse 20. the greek word used here is [I]epilusis[/I] and this is the only time it appears like this in the whole Bible. It means explanation. So basically it means no man wrote the Bible trying to explain the revelation as stated in verse 21 men spoke being moved by the Holy Spirit

I have used this one alrerady but it goes with what I am saying here so I use it again.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

1Corinthians 2:11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man within him? So also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 1Corinthians 2:12 But we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit from God, so that we might know the things that are freely given to us by God. 1Co 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

So we have the revelation from God as discussed earlier. Now we have the inspiration from the Holy Spirit. So far we see that only the apostles were included in this gift. Nowhere will you read that later in history will anthing be revealed to anyone, Joseph Smith included.

Now I go to confirmation.

Hebrews 2:3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by those who heard Him; Hebrews 2:4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with different kinds of miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will

Mark 16:17 And miraculous signs will follow to those believing these things: in My name they will cast out demons; they will speak new tongues; Mark 16:18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them. They will lay hands on the sick, and they will be well. Mark 16:19 Then indeed, after speaking to them, the Lord was taken up into Heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. Mark 16:20 And going out, they proclaimed everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the Word by miraculous signs following. Amen.

Here are two examples of confirmation which you will not see any such things with Joseph Smith. If one claims divine revelation through holy inspiration, you better start looking for confirmation through miracles.There are no records of any confirmation of anything Joseph Smith said. It is all his word based on something he said he saw in a secluded wood and from a gold plate that no one but him has ever seen.

Think about this. If you received divine revelation from God and in your hand was gold plates as proof, would you hide them or would you show them to at least your loved ones. I can find no credibility to Mr. Smith.

As my last point Jesus ascended into Heaven

Luke 24:51 And it happened as He blessed them, He withdrew from them and was carried up into Heaven.

I can not remember at this time the exact verse but there are a few that tell us Jesus is not caoming back to earth until he comes on the judegement day.

So if the Bible is a revelation of God and is inspired by God through the Holy Spirit and is confirmed by the miracles then I say Joseph Smith and any one else who says they recieved divine inspiration are not so according to what the Bible says about divine inspiration.

Re: miketpoto

yes i am mormon.

i will come back and see what cdj wrote in a few mins.

Re: miketpoto

Just a few things from mikes link

[B]Test of a prophet:[/B] "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously..." Deut 18:21-22

[B]Can even a "true" prophet have false revelations?[/B] Even Joseph Smith had to admit that some of his "revelations" might be of man or even of the devil. Comp Hist 1:165. This is contradictory in concept to the Deuteronomy 18:22 test, which says that the failure of the test indicates that the prophet is false. Joseph Smith here implies that the prophecy may be false, but the prophet himself is apparently still a prophet. One might ask then, what good is a prophet?

Hyrum Smith, who was also a "prophet," on Nov 1, 1831, commented about prophecy and said that "if you hit once in 10 times, that is alright." [quoted by Abraham O. Smoot in 1868 at the Provo School of the Prophets] This also is a contradiction of Deut 18:22.

[B]SALE OF BOOK OF MORMON COPYRIGHT:[/B] Winter 1829-1830. Comp Hist 1:165 Joseph had a revelation that Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery were to go to Toronto to sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon to raise money. [INDENT]FULFILLMENT: They went, according to the revelation, but were completely unsuccessful. Joseph Smith "inquired of God" and was told that some "revelations" are not from God. David Whitmer reports this incident in his book An Address To All Believers In Christ, Richmond, 1887, photo reprinting by Utah Lighthouse Ministry, pp 30-31

[/INDENT]

Re: miketpoto

shosh correct me if I am wrong but doesnt the book of mormon teach that Jesus will come back for a 1000 year reign on earth?

Re: miketpoto

Hey shosh, are you in utah? My ex, a good friend is from ogden, i've been b4 to visit, beautiful place.

Cowardly, Joseph Smith didnt claim to be 1800 years old, or that he saw Jesus in the flesh. He had a vision, allegedly, and the book of mormon speaks about Jesus having lived for a time in his life on earth in what is now modern day upstate new york. There is a lot more to it than that, but thats part of the basis of the mormon belief system.

As you stated that anyone who has any sense would think that this seems made up.... Who is to say that they didnt make things up 2000 years ago? It seems reasonable that a bunch of men would make things up that would scare women and men not like themselves into behaving and/or obeying them. Of course in the bible the writers will give themselves some special reason and circumstances where they are writing truly moved by the holy spirit.... If they didn't write that then any boob could just say that the speak the word of the lord (many indeed have). Just because the bible is the "original version" and it sets certain rules for itself doesnt mean that in the sequel they can't change the rules to make the storyline work. Let's not forget that Rome was conquered and ancient civilizations had risen and fell, and that man had been philosophizing for centuries if not millenia before the time the bible was written. It might have been 2000 years ago, but people were still sneaky, and greedy, and dishonest for selfish reasons even then.

I agree with you partially about so many different versions of christianity being tailored to fit individuals or groups, and how that seems a bit deluded and contradictory/hypocritical. You don't seem to be the type of christian fundamentalist that I have had screaming at me and others at AIDS charity events or Gay Pride events, and I must say that I value that you have the nature to not agree, but to let well enough alone. When I think about the tangible hatred I have for certain religious groups, its calmed me down and took me back a few steps to compare what you have said that has annoyed me to what they do that infuriates me. In perspective i have to say that while logical reason in my mind lends me to the belief that you are in "LALALAND" for things you hold true, my heart tells me that you arent a bad guy and I'm defintely crazy in many of my own ways, and as long as you arent dangerous crazy, then I can defintely deal with agreeing to disagree. I ask that you keep to yourself where it is or what it is that you believe is my fate or the fate of non-believers, cause it makes you sound like a complete dick, which I think we can both agree you don't want to be the case. Anyway, I need to get to bed, my eyes are not liking the computer screen anymore tonight.... Goodnight

Re: miketpoto

ok... I have a lot of stuff to write about.

first, no one was there with joseph smith? who was there with adam? or moses?

no proof, no credit? what's the purpose of faith then? faith is believing in things which we have not seen, but hold to be true.

some prophecies have been misinterpreted, some have not yet been fulfilled. yet there have been some amazing prophecies fulfilled (i.e. civil war).

there have been witnesses which have seen and testified about the golden plates.

we dont teach that Jesus lived in upstate new york. he revealed himself to joseph smith.

i have a few things to do write now, so i dont have the time to write about all cdj wrote about, but i will write in a few hours.

Re: miketpoto

just to clarify things I made that post before I read that you were a mormon so do not think I was trying to insult you or anything like that.

I was simply answering mikes question I read earlier in the thread

Re: miketpoto

[B]It's fine, I don't get offended by that. I'm happy to discuss my religion. One thing to keep in mind. We believe that Joseph Smith was indeed a Prophet of God, that he re-established Christ's true Church on this earth. We believe that he did see God and Jesus Christ appear to them. Therefore, if the "First Vision" is indeed true, everything else is true because he speaks and acts by the power of God. However, if that didnt happen, he is not a prophet, etc - domino effect. Now can you prove or disprove the "First Vision?" No, because it is all based on faith. How do I know it's true? Because I have prayed and asked God and I know by the power of the Holy Ghost, sent to us from the Father to testify of all things.

You cannot account for religious things by logic. But if you want to, there are plenty of historical and archeological things which attest to the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. I believe in it, and I also believe in God.

Do you believe in God? Have you seen him? Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Were you there with him? Do you believe Him to be the Son of God? Has God told you that personally?

FYI, I was a mormon missionary (in Ogden, Utah - can you believe it Mike?). I have heard these things over and over again. It is much easier for me to discuss them rather than type them. However, I was able to find something online for those really concerned and those who want to dispute the validity of "Mormonism." These are all accurate articles backed by logical, archeological, and biblical evidence, explained and taken withing context.

[url]http://www.fairlds.org[/url] and [url]http://farms.byu.edu/other_questions_evidences.php[/url] [/B] "All the prophesies of true prophets come true. However, as the Prophet Joseph Smith said:

"a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Five 1842–43, p.278)

In other words, not every word a prophet says is always considered prophesy. In addition, some prophesies are conditional in nature. For example, in the Holy Bible, the prophet Jonah prophesied that Ninevah would by overthrown within forty days:

"And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." (Jonah 3:4)

However, the people of Ninevah repented and the Lord withdrew the prophecy:

"And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did [it] not." (Jonah 3:10)

Was Jonah a false prophet? No, the prophecy was simply a conditional one.

It's rather common for anti-Mormons to try and turn every single statement ever said by any Church leader at any time into an official prophecy that has no conditions. What's especially hypocritical about this technique is that they are using the same techniques that atheists use against them. If you want a good response as to why Fundamentalist Protestant attacks against LDS Church leaders are invalid, I suggest you go to a Fundamentalist Christian bookstore, buy a book written by a Fundamentalist Christian author that refutes the attacks of atheists against the Bible, and simply apply the same principles to LDS Church leaders (e.g., "Jonah wasn't a false prophet because the prophesy was conditional in nature. Likewise Joseph Smith wasn't a false prophet because the prophecy was conditional as well).

Let us now examine three difficult Bible prophecies that would have to be rejected as false if we were to insist on judging them solely on the basis of a strictly literal reading of Deuteronomy 18:21-22.

In 2 Samuel 7: 5-17, we read that the prophet Nathan unequivocally prophesied to David that through his son Solomon the Davidic empire would be established "forever;' that the children of Israel would dwell in the promised land "and move no more," and that the "children of wickedness" would no longer afflict them. These things are quite clearly stated. No conditions are attached to these promises, none whatsoever.

That Nathan was predicting the permanent establishment of the temporal kingdom of David has even been acknowledged (albeit somewhat obliquely) by R. K. Harrison, a fine conservative Bible scholar:

    The Davidic dynasty was confidently expected to usher in a new era of Israelite life of an enduring quality (2 Sam. 7:5if), because it was firmly rooted in loyalty to the God of the Covenant. (1969:410, emphasis added.)

Robert Jamieson, Andrew Faucet, and David Brown concede that the promise of "the throne of his kingdom" being established "forever" (vs. 13) refers "in its primary application, to Solomon, and to the temporal kingdom of David's family" (587). The promise is reiterated in verse 16: "thine [David's] house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: thy throne shall be established forever." In short, as Robert H. Pfeiffer has stated,".. . the point of II Samuel 7 is the eternity of this [the Davidic] dynasty" (370). It was because of the supposed permanence of the Davidic empire that the children of Israel would be able to remain in the promised land "and move no more" (vs. 10).

And, as for the assurance that the Israelites would no longer be afflicted by "the children of wickedness" (vs. 10), the New International Version phrases it this way: "Wicked people will not oppress them any more."

But, of course, what actually happened to the Davidic empire and to the children of Israel? The Davidic dynasty was later smashed. The Israelites were driven and scattered from the promised land. And "wicked people" certainly continued to afflict and oppress them.

The second difficult Bible prophecy we will consider is one which is attributed to the Savior Himself. It is found in Matthew 10:23, wherein Jesus is represented as very matter-of-factly stating that His second coming would occur before the disciples returned from the mission on which He was then sending them. This, of course, did not happen. The verse roads as follows in the RSV:

    When they persecute you [the disciples] in one town, flee to the next; for truly, I say unto you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes.

Howard Clark Kee has said the following about this verse:

    One of the most problematic sayings in the whole Synoptic tradition [i.e., Matthew, Mark, and Luke] is this explicit statement that the disciples will not have completed their mission tour before the Son of man comes, i.e., before the age ends and the kingdom of God arrives in its fullness. (In Laymon 622)

Says T. F. Glasson, "Thus, before the disciples return Jesus expects to be caught up to heaven and to come down in glory" (57).

This verse is so problematic that many scholars have questioned its authenticity. Glasson notes that them is "widespread doubt concerning the genuineness of Matthew 10:23.. . ." (59).

The third difficult Bible prophecy we will consider is Judges 13:5, where it is recounted that an angel promised Samson's mother that Samson would "begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines." No matter how liberal or expansive one wants to be with the facts of Israelite history (as recorded in the Bible or elsewhere), there is no way it can reasonably be concluded that Samson fulfilled this prophecy.

Not only did Samson fail to even "begin" to free Israel from the Philistines, but (1) there were times when he consorted with Philistine women, (2) he married a Philistine, (3) he himself never even led any Israelite troops against the Philistines, and (4) the Philistines eventually humiliated him.

Moreover, and most importantly, Israel actually lost ground to the Philistines during Samson's tenure. Judges 13-16 illustrates Philistine encroachment into Hebrew territory. The Samson narrative documents the eastward expansion of the Philistines by mentioning the Philistine presence in Timnah and Lehi, both in the strategic valley of Sorek (Achtemeier 1985:787-791). This Philistine expansion worsened the land shortage that eventually forced the Danites to migrate northward.

Of course, the non-fulfillment of Judges 13: 5 can be attributed to Samson's failure to live according to his Nazarite calling. In addition to his sexual liaisons, he married a Philistine, ate unclean food, drank wine, and allowed his hair to be cut. Therefore, it could be said that the angel's prophecy was nullified by Samson's behavior. However, the angel placed absolutely no conditions on his promise that Samson would begin to deliver Israel from the Philistines. He simply declared that Samson would do so."

Re: miketpoto

i should have a book of Mormon laying around here somewhere, some girl that made house visits to convert people gave it to me. I guess I dissapointed them beyond belief....I have a lot of religious people on my faculty as well (still going there to be able to convert people and make bible-translations in Africa), and they have tried time and time again to convince me I was doing the wrong thing.

Never succeeded though., and of those only one has truly proven that she can accept me as I am, while I on the other hand did not have a problem with them at all I gotta say. Still, she says she will pray for me, but from her it is more meant as an expression of affection, I like that. I am very aware of the fact that estblishing a deep friendship might also be a way to 'show somebody the way', but I think she has gotten to the point where she will leave me as I am and just hope I will 'regain my senses'. She will never ever question my worldviews though, but we do have very cool discussions on life and belief in general. In fact, we agreed to do some agrumentation in a small booklet, passing it on between the two of us to answer on that what the other has written.

Those are the discussions i enjoy the most: based on equality and respect. She hardly quotes from the bible either I gotta say.

@ Cowardly: maybe that is the problem with religious people arguing with me by throwing quotes and rules out of a book to me. I do not wish to hear stuff that is written down, for then I'm not really discussing issues with a person, but rather trying to have a discourse with a book, which is a contradiction in itself, since a book cannot interpret my thoughts and opinions and give an adapted reaction to that. It's fixed.

I would very much like to continue discussions though if you or any other religious fanatic (yes, not insultingly meant, but you are) could actually enter into a discussion without quoting, but simply trying to tell me about their views on things. That way either I or my discussion partner can have a REAL discussion, instead of me getting a brick wall thrown at me....Remove the book from in between us and show me who you really are. You're not a book you know, you're the choices you make, the way you interpret, you are your virtues and your sins alltogether.

Re: miketpoto

shosh I was thinking and I have a few questions that will help me grasp the Mormon concept.

1. Do the Mormons believe that Jesus was the Son of God or just a prophet?
2. Do the Mormons believe the Bible is divine inspiration of the apostles as led by the Holy Spirit?
3. Do the Mormons believe that Jesus came to establish a literal kingdon as in King David had where Jesus would sit on a throne on earth and reign?

I have to eat and feed my son and I am going to read about some of the things you posted and I will see what I can come up with

Re: miketpoto

Yao what would you like to know about me as a person (if I understand your post correctly) that I can not divulge by hiding behind a book?

Ask and ye shall receive

Re: miketpoto

Keep the discussion going people, I am all for that, but lets remember, it's really all about me... ;)

Re: miketpoto

[quote=miketpoto]Keep the discussion going people, I am all for that, but lets remember, it's really all about me... ;)[/quote]

indeed it is

Re: miketpoto

lol @ Mike

Nothing specific Cowardly, I'm just asking that you use you own reason and logic to convince me rather than throwing verses at me: it's abstract, doesn't represent what you think (cos you didn't reason that for yourself), and I just want to hear [I]your[/I] logic, [I]your[/I] opinion as a person. Not that from the book.

If you cannot answer a question without referring to the book that is no shame dude, don't be afraid of being a little human...

Re: miketpoto

[IMG]http://www.dibec.com/burn/story.jpg[/IMG]

Re: miketpoto

[quote=Yao]lol @ Mike

Nothing specific Cowardly, I'm just asking that you use you own reason and logic to convince me rather than throwing verses at me: it's abstract, doesn't represent what you think (cos you didn't reason that for yourself), and I just want to hear [I]your[/I] logic, [I]your[/I] opinion as a person. Not that from the book.

If you cannot answer a question without referring to the book that is no shame dude, don't be afraid of being a little human...[/quote]

what me human :Who:

whoever told you that is a LIAR.

ask any question you want of me

Re: miketpoto

do you fart sometimes?

(If that is a negative you are deffo Biblebot-2000 and then I'm getting scared shit :D )

Re: miketpoto

I farted once on the set of the Blue Lagoon.

Re: miketpoto

@ CDJ

1. We do believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God.

2. The Bible is the word of God written by his prophets.

3. I'm not sure i understood this question

Re: miketpoto

shosh I have been reading much about the Mormons and I came across a statement that strikes a chord with me. It is this:

"The book of Mormon is considered by the saints as being equal with and "supporting but not supplanting" the Bible.

The deffinition of supplanting is - act of taking the place of another especially using underhanded tactics.

So if the Mormons say that the Bible is, at a minimum, equal in authority to the Bible and not to supplant it, then having that as a basis I ask then how can someone believe that Joseph Smith had a vision when the Bible clearly states that only the 12 apostles (Acts 2) were given the "power" of the Holy Spirit to guide them to to [B]ALL TRUTHS[/B] John 16:13.

So if the Book of Mormon is equal to but not to surpass the Bible then is it not true that Mr. Smith by his own admission proves himself to be a false prophet? How can one claim equality to something he denies through his own teachings and beliefs? If the Bible is to be called true then one of three things is wrong about John 16:13; either John is wrong, Jesus was wrong when he told them that they would receive ALL TRUTHS, or Mr. Smith is wrong. There is absolute conflict in this matter and all three can not be right.

Mr. Smith says that there was no proper church when he received his vision. Is that to include the church established by God on the day of Pentecost? Acts 2.

I can offer many scriptures to show that the church and the "kingdom" which Christ spoke of being at hand are the same and that the "kingdom" did come and was established.

First the prophesy of the kingdom

Daniel 2:44 And in the days of these kings, the God of Heaven shall set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed. And the kingdom shall not be left to other peoples, but it shall crush and destroy all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.

Isa 2:2 And it shall be, in the last days the mountain of Jehovah's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow into it. Isa 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come, and let us go to the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob. And He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths. For out of Zion shall go out the Law, and the Word of Jehovah from Jerusalem

Micah 4:1 But it shall be in the last days the mountain of the house of Jehovah shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be lifted up above the hills; and peoples shall flow to it. Micah 4:2 And many nations shall come and say, Come and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, and to the house of the God of Jacob. And He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths; for the Law shall go forth out of Zion, and the Word of Jehovah from Jerusalem.

Lets see if this prophesy came true. I will break this down into the different sections of the verses.

Acts 2:5 And dwelling at Jerusalem there were [B]Jews, devout men[/B] [B]out of every nation under heaven.[/B] Acts 9-11 gives us a list of 16 different nations that were present at this time. So we can see that the first part of Micah 4:2 and Isaiah 2:3 was fulfilled.

The middle part of Micha 4:2 and Isaiah 2:3 says "He will teach us of his ways" Acts 2:14-36 and 40 is Peter teaching those present about God and his ways. So that part of the prophesy has been fulfilled.

The latter part of Micah 4:1 and of Isaiah 2:2 says "and peoples shall flow into it" Here we see this has been fulfilled. I would also like to point out the word chuch in Acts 2:47. God added to the [B]church[/B] daily.

Act 2:41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized. [B]And the same day there were added about three thousand souls. [/B] Acts 2:47 praising God and having favor with all the people. [B]And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.[/B]

So it is established that the prophesy of the church has been fulfilled If there was no churche suitable to God when Mr. Smith had his vision then why would God add to the church daily those who were being saved? Again we are faced with clear contrasting statements between God and Mr. Smith. If Mr. Smith says God is credible, then why would God not have added Mr. Smith to the church he added everyone else to? Why would God have told Mr. Smith to start a new church? What happened to the people God added to the church before Mr. Smiths church? Are they lost because God added them to the wrong church?

Here are some more verses that state the kingdom did come and the kingdom is the church:

Colossians 1:13 For He has delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son;

The word translated here does not mean in the sense of translating as it means translating a different language. The greek word used in scripture is [I]methistemi[/I] and means to transfer, that is to be carried away, dispose or exchange. Also notice the the verb has [B]delivered[/B] is present tense and not future tense.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, [B]My kingdom is not of this world[/B]. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would fight so that I might not be delivered to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here. It is evident that his kingdom spoken of in scripture is not a literal kingdom to be reigned from earth.

1Timothy 3:15 But if I should delay, that you may know how you ought to behave in [B]the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth. [/B]

Mark 9:1 And He said to them, Truly I say to you that there are some of those who stand here who shall not taste of death until they see the kingdom of God come with power. So if we are to believe that some of these people would not die before Jesus kingdom comes then there are some 2000 year old people walking the earth today.

Hebrew 12:28 Therefore, since we are receiving a [B]kingdom that cannot be shaken[/B], let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear Look back up a bit to where I put the scripture Daniel 2:44 and you can see that the writer of Hebrews is speaking in present tense of a kingdom.

There are many more Matthew 16:18-19, 1 Corinthians 15:24-26, Mark 1:14-15, Luke 1:33 and I could go on and on.

I also read that Mr. Smith was visited by Peter, James and John in 1829 and these men gave Mr. Smith and Oliver Cowdery "the keys to apostleship.

Acts 1:2, John 6:70 says Jesus chose the apostles. The only other time we hear of an apostle being chosen by anyone other than Jesus is after Judas betrayed Jesus. Here the other apostles prayed and asked God to choose

Acts 1:24 And they prayed and said, You, Lord, knower of all hearts, [B]show which one You chose from these two.[/B]

If the other apostles had the power to give apostleship to Smith and Cowdery then why did't they chose the apostle to replace Judas? Why did they look to God to choose? If they had the power they would have used it.

So if they visited him and he took what they said to him serious in his visitation, then admittedly he has to think that what they say in the Bible surely must be true. If not then how can he lend credibility to what they said to him in person if what they said in the Bible is not true.

shosh of all the poeple who have responded in this thread you are the only one who has brought your faith to the table. I respect that greatly. I also would like to point out that I feel I can say things to you in context of religion that others would not understand or as have been stated take offence to. Being that you were a missionary for a time I think you are absolutely dedicated to going to Heaven. If not then you would not have used your time going on them for a cause you do not believe in. I know many people who have gone on journeys and it is a hard hard life.

I am assuming you agree with the Mormon doctrine that the Bible is true. If that be the case then I point out to you some scripture that tells us to watch out for false prophets.

1John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but try the spirits to see if they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

This one is from Peter who Mr. Smithsays is credible because he visited him 2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you

Ephesians 4:14 so that we no longer may be infants, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine, in the dishonesty of men, in cunning craftiness, to the wiles of deceit.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that Mr. Smith in evidence presented through scripture has a doctrine of men. I hope not to offend you but to provoke you to thought about a man who claims to believe in the same God he discredits with his words.

I know that 99% of the time, even in light of truth most people are not willing to examine themselves or their beliefs. Now before anyone starts to accuse me of not being willing to change mine I say this; If you can prove to me that the Bible and its contents are false then I will renounce my religion and convert happily to that truth. In light of that I challenge anyone to prove to me that the Bible is false or to bring any contridictions in the Bible forward and I will examine them with an open mind. I have spent the last few years dedicated to learning about the Bible and other denominations. I have yet to come upon any other than The Church of Christ that holds true to the scripture. I know that not all congregations that carry the name The Church of Christ are faithful though. Only the ones who stick to the doctrine of Christ and not a doctrine spoke by men. They are few and far btween because most congregations are adopting the "situatin ethics" or liberalizing themselves to fit the desires of "the many"

I hope it has been a good read for you shosh.

Re: miketpoto

Anyone with me on the idea that CDJ needs to get a job .. He might edit these posts a lil more

Re: miketpoto

[quote=Yao]do you fart sometimes?

(If that is a negative you are deffo Biblebot-2000 and then I'm getting scared shit :D )[/quote]

what me fart........:Who: that would be sacreligious. how dare you ask such a question

Re: miketpoto

[quote=bart_smastard]Anyone with me on the idea that CDJ needs to get a job .. He might edit these posts a lil more[/quote]

on vacation chief

til next week :p

Re: miketpoto

[QUOTE=miketpoto]Cowardly, Joseph Smith didnt claim to be 1800 years old, or that he saw Jesus in the flesh. He had a vision, allegedly, and the book of mormon speaks about Jesus having lived for a time in his life on earth in what is now modern day upstate new york. There is a lot more to it than that, but thats part of the basis of the mormon belief system.[/QUOTE] yeah... don't you watch South Park?

Re: miketpoto

thought u was on baby watch and the wife did the working ?

Re: miketpoto

well I was refering to being on vacation. I had 3 weeks and this is my second week

Re: miketpoto

ahhh.. got ya now

Re: miketpoto

CDJ. I think you ignored my first paragraph from my previous post completely. If Joseph Smith is a true prophet, everything you try to come up with is refuted.

Acts 2does not say that only the 12 Apostles were given the power of the Holy Ghost. There were many Apostles called even after the original 12 had died. (16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;

17 And it shall come to pass in the alast days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall edream dreams:

18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy)

Same thing applies to John 16. Jesus never said that no one else can know all truths. That would mean that the other apostles called after his death were liars.

Later on you talk about how apostles were chosen. Then we need to think about Paul and Barnabas. Paul (or Saul) didnt meet Jesus Christ, he wasnt a member of the original tweleve. Yet he has written many of the books of the New Testament and he is called an apostle. (Act 14:14 [Which] when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard [of], they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out)

When apostles are chosen they are chosen through revelation.

We believe that the Church as organized by Christ himself was gone from the earth until it was restored by Joseph Smith. We call this concept "apostasy." Please take the time and read this, so you will understand better what I mean: [url]http://www.angelfire.com/ga/kevgram3/Apostasy.html[/url]

I do not prove the Bible to be false or wrong. We hold the Bible to be the word of God. There are many scriptures that can be interpreted in any way you see fit. But that is not how you are supposed to study the Bible. I refer to articles due to my lazyness, but trust me I've had many long hours of discussion on any of these subjects with normal people, as well as preachers, pastors, and ministers. Has it done any good? No, we all went our ways believing the same thing we did before. Bible bashing as I call it does no good.

I guess the cool thing I have to my advantage is that I do believe in modern revelation and so I know that all questions i have can be answered through and because of that. If you really really want to learn more about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the mormons), I can get you lined up with your local missionaries.

But as far as questions go, please feel free to keep them coming. At the same time, those 2 sites I referred you to, have more than the necessary information you could ever use.

as someone said in an earlier post, r e s p e c t

Re: miketpoto

cool will look into it

Re: miketpoto

I was not ingnoring your earlier post I just have not approached it yet.

Re: miketpoto

no prob. take your time. i always take mine

Re: miketpoto

shosh I read the link you put up.

I saw many things that I think are contrary to the teachings of the Bible, but I know from experience that peopel who are deeply rooted in their belief are just as apt to question it as Bush is to lower gas prices. I could point out the obvious differences and errors but if the ones I have posted here already have not provoked you to thought then nothing will. That is why we are all free moral agents and are not bound to any set belief. It is just they way things are.

I am glad you are willing to talk about it though. I get much of the "I have my faith you have yours, or I dont need God I have my own morals, or Who are you to judge me.

I will post some stuff here later but I need a break. My mind is getting heavy as I have been researching deeply and have done nothing but research for the last several days.

I hope we can pick this up again, soon I just need a bit of R&R while I am on my R&R

Re: miketpoto

This has gone from a religion vs sense thread . To a religion vs religion thread . from everyone enjoying it . to two ppl enjoying it . mike this is no longer about you .. srry