by Wer62
Writers past current have practiced the art of creating the "straw man's argument". This type of argument is done in hopes that the reciepiant of the message will be confused and unable to respond or in extreme cases even come over to that persons way of thinking based on a false premise.
The straw man argument seems to be mandatory in attacks against the LDS Church. The Adam God Doctrine is one such example. According to this doctrine detrators of the LDS faith will tell you that Latter Day Saints worship Adam as God. If it were not for these detractors of the LDS faith there would be hardly anyone that would know of this doctrine. It is not taught in our scriptures or our lesson manuals. There is nobody that I know who has ever heard this taught and there is nobody that even knows somebody who even "thinks" this may have been taught or even believes it within the LDS membership.
Propping up the straw man is usually done by quoting some Mormon leader as supporting or making a supportive statement concerning a piece of doctrine. Quoting someone living of course is totally out of the question and the longer they have been dead the better off the detrators are concerning proving their point. If we use the Bible in this same fashion we can come up to some pretty funny conclusions. In Genesis we are told that Jacob made an agreement with Laban that his wages for tending Laban's herds would be the speckled and spotted catle, sheep and goats. Jacob then induced the herds to give birth to speckeled and spotted offspring by having them look at a striped stick when they concieved. [See Genesis 30:31-40]
Since the Jewish community believes in the Book of Genesis it stands to reason that they believe that what ever impresses the mind of the female at the time of conception will have a corresponding influence on the mind or body of the fetus. Since most Jews do not know they believe this it is up to us to get the word out. The advantage of not having Jacob with us is obvious.
When it comes to Christians and the New Testament, if Paul said something then they are duty bound to believe and follow it. If you take this preface then women are to keep silent in church [see 1 Corinthians 14:34], are not allowed to teach [see 1 Corinthians 11:15] and should have long hair. [see 1 Corinthians 11:15]
While these illustrations are ridiculous it is no more ridiculous than telling the LDS that they believe Adam is God. If an honest person is looking into what Christ taught would that person go to the Pharisees or Saducees? For more information please read What is Considered LDS Doctrine
52 comments:
Ed,
It is quite obvious that you neither read your Bible in context, nor do you believe God's word. As a Mormon, that would make sense that you would believe this way. Since you believe that you can believe the Bible only as far as it is translated correctly. Even going back to the Hebrew and Greek, it is obvious what is being taught. You know in your heart that this is true because God has engraved His word on every heart.
Rom 2:15 "Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)" You can try to deny it, but it is there.
As far as the Jews go:
Rom 3:1-4 says" ¶"What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."
Anon August 08, 2006 1:43 PM Stated: "It is quite obvious that you neither read your Bible in context, nor do you believe God's word."
Wer62 Replies:
Really? Such judgment from someone who clearly did not get what I wrote. I guess you missed that part where I was quoted as saying "While these illustrations are ridiculous it is no more ridiculous than telling the LDS that they believe Adam is God."
Please re-read my article I think you will get a better idea now that you know that the point of the article is that those scriptures are taken out of context.
Wer62
Ed, Now I know for sure what your problem is, You don't believe the bible as the word of God. Oh, I know will will say that is not true, but we both know better. Just by what you wrote and said proves you don't take God at his word or believe him.
Let me ask you this, When the Bible said, Moses parted the red sea, Do you believe that? When God told Moses to strike the rock so water would come out, do you believe that? When God told Moses to throw his staff on the ground and it became a snake, do you believe that. If you answer yes to all three, then why is it so hard to believe God made cattle, and sheep to be born with spots and speckles?
You said If we use the Bible in this same fashion we can come up to some pretty funny conclusions. In Genesis we are told that Jacob made an agreement with Laban that his wages for tending Laban's herds would be the speckled and spotted cattle, sheep and goats. Jacob then induced the herds to give birth to speckled and spotted offspring by having them look at a striped stick when they conceived. [See Genesis 30:31-40]
Now lets read over these verses shall we?
Gen 30:30 For [it was] little which thou hadst before I [came], and it is [now] increased unto a multitude; and the LORD hath blessed thee since my coming: and now when shall I provide for mine own house also?
Gen 30:31 And he said, What shall I give thee? And Jacob said, Thou shalt not give me any thing: if thou wilt do this thing for me, I will again feed [and] keep thy flock:
Gen 30:32 I will pass through all thy flock to day, removing from thence all the speckled and spotted cattle, and all the brown cattle among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats: and [of such] shall be my hire.
Gen 30:33 So shall my righteousness answer for me in time to come, when it shall come for my hire before thy face: every one that [is] not speckled and spotted among the goats, and brown among the sheep, that shall be counted stolen with me.
Gen 30:34 And Laban said, Behold, I would it might be according to thy word.
Gen 30:35 And he removed that day the he goats that were ringstraked and spotted, and all the she goats that were speckled and spotted, [and] every one that had [some] white in it, and all the brown among the sheep, and gave [them] into the hand of his sons.
Gen 30:36 And he set three days' journey betwixt himself and Jacob: and Jacob fed the rest of Laban's flocks.
Gen 30:37 And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which [was] in the rods.
Gen 30:38 And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.
Gen 30:39 And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.
Gen 30:40 And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban's cattle.
Now these verse are very clear, Jacob took the spotted and stripped cattle, the Bible even states Laban was mad and acting as if he was being used and mocked. If this account is not real and just a mere story, how do you interpret it? Lets add to that, that if you go to a farm or a pet store, you will see to this day, Cows, dogs, cats, Etc with spots, dots, stripes Etc.
Then you said: Since the Jewish community believes in the Book of Genesis it stands to reason that they believe that what ever impresses the mind of the female at the time of conception will have a corresponding influence on the mind or body of the fetus. Since most Jews do not know they believe this it is up to us to get the word out. The advantage of not having Jacob with us is obvious.
This clearly is not true, Again, why is it God could not have done this, this one time and performed a miracle? You deny the power of God by saying that.
Now you err in not knowing the Scripture, yet again. No surprise, you said:
When it comes to Christians and the New Testament, if Paul said something then they are duty bound to believe and follow it. If you take this preface then women are to keep silent in church [see 1 Corinthians 14:34],
If you talk to orthodox Jews, they will tell you, the churches were set up where all men sat together on one side and women sat on the other side. Women who had questions could not openly yell over to their husbands and ask questions, and could not simply get up and distract the whole group being taught. Even muslims today have this practice. And it was wrong of men to treat women this way, but they did it.
Then you said
are not allowed to teach [see 1 Corinthians 11:15]
Women Are Allowed to teach other women and kids just as the Bible teaches. Women are not allowed to teach men or be pastors of Church's. Yes women do fill these roles, but they do so because they either do not know what the scripture teaches or they don't care.
Read
1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
And read
1Ti 3:1 This [is] a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach
Now how can a women be a pastor or decon if the Bible says, Husband of one wife. Not the wife of one husband?
About this verse, did you purposely leave part of the Scripture out? or did you simply ignore it? You said and should have long hair. [see 1 Corinthians 11:15] The rest of the verse goes on to say 1Cr 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
1Cr 11:16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. Notice about the hair issue, paul plainly states, WE HAVE NO CUSTOM on this issue.
Now onto the bigger issue. You said
While these illustrations are ridiculous it is no more ridiculous than telling the LDS that they believe Adam is God. If an honest person is looking into what Christ taught would that person go to the Pharisees or Sadducees?
I am not teaching any one or telling anyone Adam is God. Brigham Young is the one who said this. Lets add to that, anyone who reads Ed's topic about what is LDS scripture, please read the entire Adam God topic posted on my blog. You can read the scanned oringal Document and read for yourself where BY says, Adam is God, He says Prophets of old taught this, he says it is Scripture and he says, Your salvation depends upon this teaching. BY taught this as Scripture and clearly says so. As A result this Adam God teaching is not a Straw man argument and it is not a lie promoted by Anti mormons.
Anyone who reads what BY taught will clearly understand why the Mormon Church denies this teaching. Because if it is true, then the LDS church is teaching lies and is a false Church. I notice in Ed's topic, he never mentions BY teaching this as Scripture, never mentions BY saying this is a doctrine that he received from God, He never mentions BY teaching this is a Doctrine according to the Prophet himself.
According to Acts 17:11 you are to search the Scriptures, not just believe anything I or Ed says. But with that in mind, who do you believe, The Mormon Prophet who Clearly spoke saying this is Doctrine and your salvation hangs upon this. Or do you believe A man (Ed) who does not believe his own prophet and he himself is not a prophet or even a president? Rick b
Rick,
Thank you for proving my point...
Read my first comment in this thread and put it in context of what I wrote. Perhaps you just don't get what it is I am attempting to convey.
"Since the Jewish community believes in the Book of Genesis it stands to reason that they believe that what ever impresses the mind of the female at the time of conception will have a corresponding influence on the mind or body of the fetus. Since most Jews do not know they believe this it is up to us to get the word out. The advantage of not having Jacob with us is obvious."
I guess you don't get sarcasm when you read it. I am not saying that the Jews believe that if they look at or think something that the fetus will 'do that'" That was the point.
Then my conclusion sums up my stand. "While these illustrations are ridiculous it is no more ridiculous than telling the LDS that they believe Adam is God."
Rick, I said that these illustrations meaning the examples given. Do you believe that your wife looking at something or thinking something is going to "change the fetus"? I don't. I do understand the message of the "spotted and speckled herds" and I do belive in God's hand in those evenst. I took it out of context just as people like you take the "Adam God Theory and tell people that this is doctrine of our Church when it is not. This is the point you have clearly missed.
Then because of your lack of understanding you judge me?
Wer62
Stop being so dishonest Ed.
Your being very dishonest in the fact that you act like it is us Non-LDS who came up with the Adam God Doctrine. Be man enough and honest enough to admit BY taught it and it was BY who spoke this. You have a brain, I suspect you have at the very least JoD vol 1 with the Adam God teaching in it.
If you dont believe the Adam God teaching that is fine, so you think BY is a liar, As I clearly pointed out, It was BY that spoke that teaching, not me or any other Non-LDS.
Then please while your at it, explain why if BY said it is Doctrine, And God reveled it to him, and HE said your salvation hangs upon this teaching, and he taught the Prophets of old and the Jews taught and believed this, How is it you think it was BY mere opinion in light of all he said.
Again stop being dishonest and acting as if I came up with this idea of Adam God. It is kinda like people getting mad at us Christians for saying (JESUS IS THE ONLY WAY TO THE FATHER).
I did not say that, Jesus said and taught this, I am only saying what he taught and I believe Jesus. Same goes for BY, He spoke it, I as a non mormon happen to believe him, yet you as a mormon Dont believe him, How sad, a mormon who does not believe his own Prophet. Rick b
Rick,
The JOD is not doctrine, Please show me in what General Conference they enacted the Adam God Doctrine. I don't know how many times the LDS have told you that the JOD was not even published by the LDS church and that Brigham Young had to make so many corrections (which btw is not in the JOD) that he had the practice of allowing NON LDS people to publish the JOD. (thus discontinued) To me and many LDS it is no different that the apocrypyha there are some good things in it but only decerning people can extract the good from the bad teachings. Just like my earlier commment I could use the Apocrypha to discredit all of Christianity if I were to take on the endevor. (something I do not want to do because I love Christ and that would not be Christian)
I forgive you of your ignorance in the matter.
Wer62
I know the JoD is not doctrine, but here are some facts that I know you know about. 1. BY did say and teach it even if you disagree with it.
2. the king follet discouse is said to be Joseph Smiths greatest sermon ever given. why is it ok to use a teaching the LDS love and use and cal it the greatest sermon ever given, yet the books it is from are not scripture. their seems to be no mistakes in that sermon.
3. many mormon prophets even to this day quote from the JoD in vast amounts.
4. the book (discourses of by) was posted back in 1925 and it was 700 plus pages of sermons from the JoD then it was republised in the 50's.
so much for the JoD was not doctrine but you use it anyway. rick b
To Rick,
Did you not read my last response or did you just not get it?
I said there are some good things in the JOD just as there are in the Apocrypha (you do know what that is don't you?) Yet it is NOT doctrine.
Simple and to the point.
Now let me say one last thing concerning this matter. Rick, you are free to believe as you wish, no matter how wrong you are but to call me a liar in the process is just flat out wrong.
That argument can go both ways.
Wer62
Rick,
i think of all people posting here or at your own BLOG you have the least room to accuse anyone else of being dishonest.
I believe you invent your own version of Mormoism and the faith of others to suit your own agenda. I have seen the Mormon people tell you over and over again that the JOD is not scripture and you seem to insist on defining them in ways that violate their own self understanding. In the last analysis the Mormon people are following Jesus Christ however wrong they might or might not be in other areas.
I am not an expert on Mormonism but i know when one is atempting to misrepresent the beliefs of another when i see it and i have to say that t is getting harder and harder to take you seriously Rick.
Casual Observer said...
Rick,
I have seen the Mormon people tell you over and over again that the JOD is not scripture and you seem to insist on defining them in ways that violate their own self understanding.
You must have missed the part I wrote where I said, I understand the JoD is not scripture.
You also choose to ignore the facts or simply ignore the facts. Ed is being dis-honest by allowing people to believe things by not fulling stating all the facts. Lets start with the issue of, I delete replys from my blog. I have, but he does not say that I have given a reason as to why. He or others might disagree with my reasons, But I give reasons for doing it and he does not tell people, I gave reasons. He simply points out I deleted things, Leaving people to believe I removed things I did not like or could not answer.
Their are many things on my blog I dont agree with, but they are their. At least be honest enough to state, while I deleted things I gave a reason for it.
Now again, on the Adam God Issue, While it is not Scripture let me ask you Ed, Again, like you did to me.
Did Brigham Y say Adam was Our God and Father. Y/N
Did Brigham Y say this was reveled to him By God the father Y/N
Did Brigham Y say this was Doctrine Y/N
Did Brigham Y say our salvation hangs upon what we do with this info Y/N
Did Brigham Young say that he never sent Any thing out he would not call Scripture Y/N
If you answer no to these, then Please explain why, as they are in the JoD. these questions are not a matter of DO YOU or LDS believe it, it is a matter of DID BRIGHAM YOUNG say this and teach it.
Then if you answer yes to these questions, I need to ask you, how is it you admit Brigham Young Did say and teach this was reveled from God, yet you and other LDS feel it is his mere opinion and Not Scripture as he clearly stated. Then, As I said before, It is not Scripture if LDS dont like it, but it is scripture when LDS agree with it. Much of what is taught in the King Follet Discouse is taken as scripture to this day by LDS members.
Then the PROPHET Ezra Taft benson, when he gave his 14 fundamentiles teaching stated, the Prophet speaks for the LORD IN EVERYTHING, and the PROPHET does not need to say, THUS SAITH THE LORD to give us scripture.
He used the LDS 4 standerd works which are Scripture and the JoD to support his view. I know at the time of this speech he was not a prophet, But he has never gone back to retract his teaching after being a prophet, which implyes it is used and taken as truth.
Casual observer, You can say, you dont take me seriousl, Frankly I dont care, Look over Non-LDS people like Bill Mckever of MRM or other so called anti-mormons on the issue of Adam God, they all teach and say pretty much the same stuff. So does this mean you dont take them seriously either? Rick b
Hey Casual Observer,
I thought I would share one more thought. As I said, I dont care if you take me seriously or not, here is another reason why. I have learned since having a blog, anyone can lie and post under a fake name. you can supply all the info you want about your self, but how do I know your not really a mormon just saying stuff to make people think, yea rick has no clue. Not saying you are a mormon, point is, When posting under a fake name, no one really knows who you are. Rick b
Rick,
like i said i dont know a lot about Mormonism. i am not schooled in its doctrines and teachings and i have not spoken with a lot of Mormons about their faith. but i have spent time in conversations with Catholics and Jews and people of other faiths and i know enough to know that everyones faith, right or wrong. requires a degree of sensitivity and willingness to see things as others see them to be able to really understand where they are coming from. im not saying one has to agree but one must understand first. in fact how can one even make a judgement at all before one understands?
what i see here and what sparked my comment is one group of beleivers saying this is how we see it and what we believe and then you leaping in saying- "no you dont, you really believe this, and this is the way you see it". It just makes me ask myself how does Rick know better than they do? like i said i do not know a lot about Mormonism but they are following Jesus Christ. I cant completely judge them because i know very little but from what i know they seem as sincere and dedicated as any i know. again not saying they are right or wrong but just think you should give them more credit. It is not like they are athiest or buddist or somthing like that.
i like following along but rarely post which is why i am "casual observer"
i did not mean to intrude.
They dont know Jesus Christ. They have a false Gospel and are being decived by satan, Read Gal 1:8.
As to they are sincere and loving, Lets look at Ed, He is playing judge over me by making a blog with a link to my blog. he alone decide he does not like the fact I deleted some replys and I clearly stated why I deleted said replys. So Ed decides he will be the Judge over my blog and try and control what is deleted and what is not by forming this blog. Where does he get off on deciding who is deleted and who is not. Not that Ed cares but he is lost any shred of intregity in my eyes. So much for the Sincere loving mormons who dont Judge other. He has set himself up as judge over my blog, and notice under his missing respotiry blog, mine and mine alone is listed. Rick b
Rick,
you are so extreme. the claims in your last comment are so petty and juvanile.
you seem to me to be a desperate man just grasping for somthing of substance. who are you to say somthing like "They dont know Jesus Christ. They have a false Gospel and are being decived by satan" How in the world do you know where their hearts are Rick? Who in the world gave you the ability to judge another persons heart toward Jesus? Satan does not encourage people to follow Jesus. Jesus is a real being and is God and i have a hard time imagineing he is some how just "false" to Mormons and not false to everyone else. How can that be? The Bible clearly teaches that whomsoever calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. Again, i dont know a lot about Mormons but i do know Jesus would never reject anyone who sincerly comes unto him regardless of what that person might be right or wrong about in other areas. i think you are too much of a finger pointer and underestimate Jesus and his love for all people and his capacity to save all who come unto him.
Reading your comments makes me think who in the world does this Rick guy think he is to say somthing like that? how in the world do you know who Jesus will save and who calls on him with a sincere heart?
You should spend less time pointing fingers and condeming and try to treat people with a spirit of charity and love more like the way Jesus would have us do.
i think you are a very angry and mixed up person. You should spend more time spreading peace and goodwill rather than all the negative stuff then people would be more willing to really listen to what it is you have to say and everyone could share more with a spirit of peace and willingness to understand each other.
Try less judgeing and more peace. or at least chill out some. After all everyone here is trying to follow Jesus so how can that be a bad thing? at least give people the benefit of the doubt.
this is the longest comment i have ever left. sorry for inturupting.
God Bless
Long as it may be casual observer. it is very nicely written, to the point and well put. you have hit the nail right on the head.
Casual Observe,
Let me ask you something, You say, How can I say what I do?
How do you then handle these bible Verses?
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness
Paul speaks about the wrath of God, due to people holding the truth in unrighteousness. Where does paul get off telling people they are living in sin?
Read Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
When paul says, Let them be accursed, he is saying may they be damned to hell. Again where does paul get off telling them to go to hell if they preach a false Gospel.
I think you should quesion paul as to why he is pointing fingers instead of speading love and peace.
What about 2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power
Boy this is not very nice thing to say is it, Wheres the Love?
What about Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Boy that Jude is not very loving Saying stuff like, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jud 1:8 Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
Boy that was not very nice again of jude to say was it?
What about this Jud 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds [they are] without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Jud 1:13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
Jud 1:15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
Jud 1:16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling [words], having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.
Jud 1:17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
Jud 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
Jud 1:19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
Dude, Read your bible, This does not even touch what was said by Jesus and his Apostles, About FALSE TEACHES AND FALSE CHRISTS AND FALSE GOSPELS.
You are correct to some degree, All roads lead to the throne room of God, But only one door enters into heaven. Just because someone says I follow or believe in Jesus Means nothing, if that Jesus is a false Jesus.
I also do not trust you who ever you are, I see you rebuke me for saying what the scriptures teach, But I dont see you rebuking Ed for his ungodly un rightousess attidue. He uses dishonest means and no one says boo to him, but me you all come after. Thats fine I dont care, I just am exposing the Hyprocisy of you all by pointing out how you try and quote scripture to me when you yourself either dont know what it says or you ignore the verses in the bible, and if your going to be this fair well balanced loving person you try and claim to be, then you should rebuke both sides not one to the exclusion of the other.
But that again is to be expected, your deeds are evil and if you come to the light they will be expoused. Rick b
Passage Matthew 7:1:
Matthew 7
Judging Others
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
RICK SAYS:Dude, Read your bible, This does not even touch what was said by Jesus and his Apostles, About FALSE TEACHES AND FALSE CHRISTS AND FALSE GOSPELS.
You are correct to some degree, All roads lead to the throne room of God, But only one door enters into heaven. Just because someone says I follow or believe in Jesus Means nothing, if that Jesus is a false Jesus.
I also do not trust you who ever you are, I see you rebuke me for saying what the scriptures teach, But I dont see you rebuking Ed for his ungodly un rightousess attidue. He uses dishonest means and no one says boo to him, but me you all come after. Thats fine I dont care, I just am exposing the Hyprocisy of you all by pointing out how you try and quote scripture to me when you yourself either dont know what it says or you ignore the verses in the bible, and if your going to be this fair well balanced loving person you try and claim to be, then you should rebuke both sides not one to the exclusion of the other.
But that again is to be expected, your deeds are evil and if you come to the light they will be expoused. Rick
Passage Luke 6 :
Luke 6
Love for Enemies
27"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.
Judging Others
37"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
39He also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.
41"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
A Tree and Its Fruit
43"No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. 44Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. 45The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks.
The Wise and Foolish Builders
46"Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say? 47I will show you what he is like who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice. 48He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. 49But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete."
Footnotes:
boy, isn't God merciful?
rick b is like a rapid dog and then has the cheek of calling the owner of this blog dishonest, i wonder if he has ever heard the saying " the pot calling the kettle black, or is it the other way round.
he has become like a drowning man graping at objects to keep himself afloat
Rick,
i am not so sure how to respond to you, or even if i should. doing so seems to be a lot like punching a tar baby. it just gets messier and messier. yuck.
having barely just met you you say my deeds are evil. how in the world could you even know that?- what are you talking about? How can you go around saying things like that?
As to the scriptures you referenced and your question as to how i respond to them my answer would be this. You are a lot like a bull in a china shop and use the Bible like a weapon to hurt and mame. I beleive the bible too Rick. but you are crude and brutal and filled with self justification and seem unable to beleif that other people can come to their own understanding of Gods word too without your help. the passages you reference talk about the "unrighteous", "ungodly" and those that "deny the Lord God" and deny "Jesus Christ". such people in the context of these pasages deserve to hear such words from God because they are wicked unbelievers unconcerned with following Jesus. but the people you are talking to here claim to love Jesus Christ and seek to worship and follow him. The passages you reference are not talking about people who are earnestly striving to follow Jesus. they are talking about just the opposite ie: people who deny him, do not seek to do his will, and dont want to follow him. Can you not see the glaring difference?
Weather you or Mormons are right or wrong about particular details is not the point. The point is and what would be my prayer that you may come to realize is that despite being right or wrong about particualr things that Jesus himself is loving, kind and gracious enough to save ALL people who earnestly call on him and strive to follow him. Rick, that is not because Mormonism is right or you are right or I am right. Rather that is because Jesus himself is that good, benevolent and gracious to eagerly accept all that call on him. Praise God! it really does not matter what church one goes to but where ones heart is, and who are you to judge another persons heart?- that is Jesus's job!
My prayer for you would be that you find the tender side of Gods love, that you see ALL people the way that he does and know that he is pleased when even the least of us strives to come unto him.
Going around accusing others who follow Jesus as being of Satan is just not a good thing to be doing Rick. not a good idea really. why not start with what we all allready have in common, a love for Jesus and a desire to follow him and follow his sweet, sweet spirit here until it chases out all the yucky stuff. then when Jesus spirit is strong here and he knows he is the center of all we do it will be easy to talk abou all the other things if we want to. I am sure you have many good things to say and a lot to contribute Rick but you will do much more good and be happier when you are able to stay in Jesus's love and sweet sprit and not the ugliness.
rick please do not feel like i am picking on you. my first comment the one that just started this whole thing was just just directed toward what would do the most good here. You are in my prayers Rick along with everyone else here. May God be glorified in all things and his peace reign!!
Ed, I see your avoiding my questions, why? You know your wrong and wont admit it? Dont tell me your busy and I am getting impatient. I have noticed, since I asked You my questions you have replyed to other posters and left a new topic.
Andy, I am not one bit surprised when You Quote, Do not judge to me, That you never point that out to Ed, as he made hiomself Judge over my Blog. And appers to refuse to answer the question of where does he get off on deciding who can reply on my blog, This make him very dishonest. He should simply remove the I AM A GOOD SMARTAIN GARBAGE FROM HIS BLOG.
Then while you quote select verses, your forget to add the Bible verses that speak about When We do judge, and we are to make judgments. I guess if you added those your reply would be worthless. Rick b
Casual Observer,
You said you know the Bible, I guess you really do not, Or you dont know it very well. Right before Gal 1:8-9 are verses 6-7. Notice what they say.
Gal 1:6 ¶ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
They talk about people being removed from the grace of Christ and His Gospel, unto another Gospel. Read all the various bible verses that speak about people walking away from their faith, or leaving their first love, or having their faith shipwrecked.
Then the bible verses I quoted that you stated, were speaking to unbelievers and the unrightouness, Remember, those are the people as are the false Prophets mentioned in the Bible, that try and take you away from the true faith in christ.
Do you really believe, False prophets and wolves in sheeps clothing are going to tell you, Hi I am a false prophet or I am a wolf come to kill you?
Mormons have a false gospel, I find it really funny that you can admit, you dont know much about mormons at all, but yet your confident enough to tell me I am wrong about them.
If you dont know what they believe, how can you tell me I am wrong. Honestly, the whole world can tell me I am wrong, God spoke to me, and as the prophets in the bible were killed for sharing the message, I will not be slowed down, because someone feels me sharing the truth is wrong.
The bible says, SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES, I have, I even read their books been to their church servecies and spent two weeks in SLC touring the temple. They are a false religion, no matter how nice and sincere they sound. If they are wrong thenm they both will spend eterinty apart from Christ and also drag souls to hell with them
Casual Observer,
Let me add another thing. The Bible teaches that Wolves will come in Sheeps Clothing. The Bible refers to us believers as Sheep. Where do you think that the wolf Got the Sheeps Clothing. He did not buy it at a store, He did not remove it from a dead sheep, he had to kill that sheep in order to obtain the sheeps clothing.
Wolves come to kill and destory the sheep. Mormons might be sincere in their faith, but still sincere is not good enough to enter heaven.
Read in the book of acts, the slave girl that was demon possesed. While she spoke the truth about paul and his mission, he still rebuked her and the demon, Demons even Spoke truth to Jesus by saying he was the Son of God. Jesus rebuked them, Why? They do not need devils telling the gospel message.
Then read over in the book of Revelation, about the great white throne judgment, People say to God, LORD LORD, Did we not do miracles in your name, Did we not do they awsome works Etc. What was Gods reply, Depart from me, into everlasting fire.
Despite the fact we do good works in the name of God means nothing. Then in case you were not aware of this, Joseph F Smith, the 1oth president and Prophet of the Mormon Church said this: Read pg 188 of
Doctrines of Salvation vol 1
Joseph F Smith. "CHURCH STANDS OR FALLS WITH JOSEPH SMITH. MORMONISM, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. Their is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed: his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false". So I am also doing what the Mormon Prophet Said. So here I am listening to the Mormons, yet they still get mad. Rick b
uh, NO. the only one that seems mad here is you rick. when your writing all this things, you are looking yourself in the mirror too right?
I mean no disrespect but you do not have a clue when it comes to how to "treat" people and you are so judgemental that it is hard to communicate with you.
Rick Stated:
Ed, I see your avoiding my questions, why? You know your wrong and wont admit it? Dont tell me your busy and I am getting impatient. I have noticed, since I asked You my questions you have replyed to other posters and left a new topic.
Wer62 Responds
First off Rick I have replied to you twice. You seem to have left that out. I clearly put the burden of proof on you to prove it is "Doctrine" and you clearly have not done so. Therefore it matters not what is says in the JOD it is not doctrine of the LDS Church.
Here however is some things to consider while you go and persecute the LDS for somthing Brigham Young did not teach or agree with concerning Doctrine and these Expressions from Brigham Young prove as much.
EXPRESSIONS FROM BRIGHAM YOUNG
How has it transpired that theological truth is thus so widely disseminated? It is because God was once known on the earth among his children of mankind, as we know one another.
Wer62 States: This does not say the Adam is God
Adam was as conversant with his Father who placed him upon this earth as we are conversant with our earthly parents.
Wer62 States: Clearly this does not state that Adam is God
The Father frequently came to visit his son Adam, and talked and walked with him; and the children of Adam were more or less acquainted with him, and the things that pertain to God and to heaven were as familiar among mankind in the first ages of their existence on the earth, as these mountains are to our mountain boys. . . .
Wer62 States: This clearly is not stating that Adam is God.
How did Adam and Eve sin? Did they come out in direct opposition to God and to His government? No. But they transgressed a command of the Lord, and through that transgression sin came into the world. . . .
Wer62 States: This clearly is saying that Adam is not God
The human family are formed after the image of our Father and God. After the earth was organized the Lord placed his children upon it, gave them possession of it, and told them that it was their home. . . . Then Satan steps in and overcomes them through the weakness there was in the children of the Father when they were sent to the earth, and sin was brought in, and thus we are subject to sin. . . .
Wer62 States: Clearly this is not saying that Adam is God
Our Lord Jesus Christ—the Savior, who has redeemed the world and all things pertaining to it, is the Only Begotten of the Father pertaining to the flesh.
Wer62 States: Clearly this contridicts your thought process on the Adam God "Theory" (which is not doctrine)
The Latter-day Saints believe in Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of the Father, who came in the meridian of time, performed his work, suffered the penalty and paid the debt of man's original sin by offering up himself, was resurrected from the dead, and ascended to his Father; and as Jesus descended below all things, so he will ascend above all things.
Wer62 States: This clearly contridicts your understanding of the "Adam God Theory"
EXPRESSIONS BY BRIGHAM YOUNG ARE VERY CLEAR
It is very clear from these expressions that Brigham Young did not believe and did not teach, that Jesus Christ was begotten by Adam. He taught that Adam died and that Jesus Christ redeemed him. He taught that Adam disobeyed the commandment of the Father, or God, and was driven from the Garden of Eden. He said that Adam was conversant with his Father in the Garden of Eden. This is believed by all members of the Church, and that the Father was in the Garden of Eden until Adam was driven out for his transgression.
If Brigham Young were here we could ask him what he actually said and what he meant by it, but he is not here, and even expert students of his thought are left to wonder whether he was misquoted, whether he meant to say one thing and actually said another, whether he was somehow joking with or testing the Saints, or whether some vital element that would make sense out of the reports has been omitted.
The Father of Jesus Christ is the same character who was in the Garden of Eden, I maintain that President Young was not referring to Adam, but to God the Father, who created Adam, for he was in the Garden of Eden, and according to Mormon doctrine Adam was in his presence constantly, walked with him, talked with him and the Father taught Adam his language. It was not until the Fall, that the Father departed from Adam and from the Garden of Eden.
Surely we must give President Brigham Young credit for at least ordinary intelligence, and in stating this I placed it mildly. If he meant to convey the thought that the character who was in the Garden of Eden, and "who is our Father in Heaven," was Adam, then it would mean that this expression was in conflict with all else that he taught concerning God the Father, and I am bold to say that Brigham Young was not inconsistent in his teaching of this doctrine.
The very expression in question: the same character that was in the Garden of Eden, and "who is our Father in Heaven," contradicts the thought that he meant Adam
Brigham Young's quote of the sermon in all probability was erroneously transcribed
For the Latter-day Saints, however, the point is moot, since whatever Brigham Young said, true or false, was never presented to the Church for a sustaining vote. It was not then and is not now a doctrine of the Church
Conclusion: The JOD is not fully reliable but does not show anywhere that Brigham Young said that this was "Doctrine" nor did he say in this discourse that we must take it as "Doctrine"
Now lets address how judgmental you are. In this thread alone you have accused me of
Just in this thread alone you have stated the following about me:
1. You don't believe the bible as the word of God.
2. You are dishonest
3. You are avoiding my questions.
Clearly Rick, you have no idea what is going on in my life so please do not tell me that I am not busy. I am.
My dad is back in the ICU. (Hospital for you since you probably do not understand what ICU means) [Intensive Care Unit] In case you forgot he is terminally ill. He has made it 7 months and who knows how long he will go. Bottom line it still could be months it really depends on him and his will to live and the treatment he recieves from the Doctors. But hey Rick, you know all about me don't you.
I have a job in which I at times have to work a lot of hours. I am thankful I am in demand and my mental capacity is needed. You seem to have plenty of time on your hands and all I have to say to that is hmmmmm..
I have a family and my family will always come before you. Playing with my son is more important than giving you an answer you will not accept anyway. You have already made up your mind.
On top of all that I helped a family tonight who will have to move tonight that is in desparate need of some help. (No they are NOT LDS) but their house is in need of repair some of which are safety issues and they have kids. I would hate to see anyone get hurt so I agreed to help them. Granted only for a couple of hours but hey it is all I can do for them tonight. Again Rick, you know everything about me so you tell me Rick, What are you doing for your neighbors tonight? Ragging on them because they did not give you an answer fast enough or not up to "your" standards? What a world you must live in that you are better than everyone else.
You claim I am dishonest. Wow, from someone who wants to tell me what our doctrine is and does not have a full understanding of his own. You still have not answered if you know what the apocrypha is?
Have you read it, will you examine some of the writtings of Paul or John in it and come to the same conclusion that Christianity is false? There is a reason the Apocrypha is not scripture. Same reasons apply for the JOD.
Another example of someone who wants to judge the LDS on a different standard then the rest of Christian society.
Lastly, you say I do not believe in the Bible. I sure do, (just as you said I would say) we have an article of Faith that states we believe in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. So tell me Rick, which version of the Bible is most correct. KJV, NKJV, NIV, Giddeon, The New Living Bible, The Living Bible and the list goes on. I think you get my point.
All this because you had to rebuke me for helping you. What a man you are. Yet I forgive you and my hope is that God will as well. Here is a hint Rick. [Repent]
Wer62
I would like to thank Wolf, Casual and Andy for your responses.
Wer62
ed I(applaud) and you are welcome.
Hello Wolf, No I am not mad, My writing style is not the best so at times their is confusin. But the way I see it is like this, Gal 1:8-9 talk about a false Gospel, read the bible, look at what it says about Liars people who love lies teach lies and the doom that awaits false teachers and false prophets. Hint, REad Romans chapters 1-3, try the book of jude, try the book of revelation, the great white throne judgment.
If people get mad at me for trying to expouse error and false doctrine, in the hopes some will avoid the terror of hell that awaits them, then so be it. Rick b
Ed, Dont Tell me Brigham Young NEVER SAID ADAM WAS NOT GOD, I posted the entire thing on my blog for people to read. Let me refresh your memory on what he said. I quote Brigham Young
"It is my intention to preach several discourses this evening, but how many I do not know." During his speech President Young explained that he was going to speak on the character of the "well-beloved Son of God, upon which subject the Elders of Israel have conflicting views."
Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken--HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later.
However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone. I have heard men preach upon the divinity of Christ, and exhaust all the wisdom they possessed. All Scripturalists, and approved theologians who were considered exemplary for piety and education, have undertaken to expound on this subject, in every age of the Christian era; and after they have done all, they are obliged to conclude by exclaiming "great is the mystery of godliness," and tell nothing. "Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation."
Did Brigham young Say this? Yes or NO!. If he did not, then please provide evidence to who did and why they say it was Brigham Young. If you admit he did, but maintain he was in correct, please provide evidence of how he was wrong, not Simply a Well I dont like it, theirfore he was wrong.
Brigham Young was not misunderstood since his first counselor, Heber C. Kimball, declared on June 29, 1856, "I have learned by experience that there is but one God that pertains to this people, and He is the God that pertains to this earth--the first man. That first man sent his own Son to redeem the world, to redeem his brethren; his life was taken, his blood shed, that our sins might be remitted. That Son called twelve men and ordained them to be Apostles, and when he departed the keys of the kingdom were deposited with three of those twelve, viz.: Peter, James, and John" (Journal of Discourses 4:1).
Then Brigham Young Said
"I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture" (Journal of Discourses 13:95). Brigham would repeat this again in October of the same year (Journal of Discourses 13:264).
How can he say that very much later, enough time passed for him to be told of any error and correct it, if in fact he was wrong.
Ed, You did lie and are dishonest.
You lied when you said you were to busy to reply to me. I know your busy, but I posted then after I asked you 3-4 times where you get off on being my judge on how my blog is run and who posts, you posted a topic and left many replys, then still dont answer my question by saying your to busy.
You were not to busy to post a topic, do the research for it and reply to others. THis means you lied. Are you going to answer this question or not. Either way, you not only lied but are not a good samartain, Like I said, who gave you the right to run my blog and decide who replys. Rick b
Rick Stated:
Ed, Dont Tell me Brigham Young NEVER SAID ADAM WAS NOT GOD, I
Wer62 Replies:
My text earlier answers this question already. Since the JOD is unreliable in this case probably due to a transcription error then he might have never said it. That stated I said might. It is you that is passing judgment relying on the JOD which we know is not a totally reliable source. You call me a liar but you refuse to take the JOD for what it is.
---------------------------
If Brigham Young were here we could ask him what he actually said and what he meant by it, but he is not here, and even expert students of his thought are left to wonder whether he was misquoted, whether he meant to say one thing and actually said another, whether he was somehow joking with or testing the Saints, or whether some vital element that would make sense out of the reports has been omitted.
The Father of Jesus Christ is the same character who was in the Garden of Eden, I maintain that President Young was not referring to Adam, but to God the Father, who created Adam, for he was in the Garden of Eden, and according to Mormon doctrine Adam was in his presence constantly, walked with him, talked with him and the Father taught Adam his language. It was not until the Fall, that the Father departed from Adam and from the Garden of Eden.
Brigham Young's quote of the sermon in all probability was erroneously transcribed
--------------------------
Rick States:
Ed, You did lie and are dishonest.
You lied when you said you were to busy to reply to me. I know your busy, but I posted then after I asked you 3-4 times where you get off on being my judge on how my blog is run and who posts
Wer62 Replies:
Rick, I only have so many hours in a day and this Blog is not my only correspondence and correspondence to you takes a lower priority sice you choose to abuse me espcially in matters on a whole Blog and why I started it. You accuse me of being a "judge" over you but you have judged me caling me a liar. Who are you especially in light of you have no idea who I am or what I have going to tell me I am not to busy. So please until you are in my shoes you can't even begin to know what is going on over here and I can pick and choose anyway I want to who I answer and when. This is one of many examples of your "abusive language"
As for "being a judge over your blog" I am no such thing. I am just provideing a service for anyone for any blog that wants to post comments that are being deleted from other Blogs.
You still run your Blog and have the right to delete what you want there. So I am not "judging your Blog" To date the only Blog I have requests for in this light is your blog. I am sure once the word gets out I will get requests for others.
And Rick, one more thing. The moment you think you deserve an answer doesn't mean I have to respond to you at all. There are questions I will not answer. I choose who to correspond with and when based on priorities I set. I do not tell you when you have to post a new topic or to respond what gives you the right to “judge me” in this area since we are speaking of judging here. After all I choose how much "abuse" I want to take from you and who I wish to respond to and what and when I choose to publish. To me it is more important to push forward with other topics that to argue with you over something that is so stupid that you want to tell us what our doctrine is.
Unlike you I have not deleted any comments you have made. I unlike you are secure in my faith and have a firm foundation in Christ so I do not feel threatened by your actions.
My fifteen minute break is over and I need to get back to work.
The JoD is not Scripture and cannot be trusted when the LDS do not like what is being said. When the LDS do not agree with it or like what it says it means the person speaking was either copied incorrectly or it was their mere opioin.
But when the LDS like what was written, they use it and even except it as scripture. Example The King follet Discourse. That to this day is said to be the greatest sermon ever given by JS, And much of it is scripture.
Funny how you dont trust the JoD, but you trust the LDS enough to say that was not written in error and enough to believe it is scripture and fact. Funny how that works. How exactly is it, Brigham Young is not around to ask him, what did you mean about Adam God, theirfore we cannot trust it. Yet JS is not around to ask what exactly he ment with the King follet Discourse, but we trust that and know what he ment.
Also what evdince do the LDS use to say the Adam God is incorrect? do you use that same evidence with the K.F.D? what about all the quotes to this day even from Mordern LDS prophets who quote the JoD. How can we trust those quotes? To many holes in the LDS logic, Looks like swiss cheese. Rick b
LDS say that they are following Jesus Christ, then why don't you quote the Bible or use it in context to the situation given?
Certainly, quoting other men in their walk with God doesn't prove a personal relationship with Jesus. Next, this shows me that those who looked to those people didn't go back to Scripture to see if what they were saying was true. Those that did, would have seen that what they were teaching was false.
Lastly, I would caution everybody in the way that they use the word "nice." If you do a little bit of research (like looking it up in the dictionary) you'll find that "nice" means ignorant!
Roaming Gnome said:
Lastly, I would caution everybody in the way that they use the word "nice." If you do a little bit of research (like looking it up in the dictionary) you'll find that "nice" means ignorant!
August 11, 2006 6:12 PM
well now, thank you for your knowledge. then it gives me much pleasure to say ROAMING GNOME and RICK B. you are both EXTREMELY NICE.
Question for Wolf: What is the value in the last post you made?
Do you feel better that you have now called someone ignorant?
Anonymous said...
Question for Wolf: What is the value in the last post you made?
Do you feel better that you have now called someone ignorant?
August 11, 2006 7:40 PM
Roaming Gnome said...
LDS say that they are following Jesus Christ, then why don't you quote the Bible or use it in context to the situation given?
Certainly, quoting other men in their walk with God doesn't prove a personal relationship with Jesus. Next, this shows me that those who looked to those people didn't go back to Scripture to see if what they were saying was true. Those that did, would have seen that what they were teaching was false.
Lastly, I would caution everybody in the way that they use the word "nice." If you do a little bit of research (like looking it up in the dictionary) you'll find that "nice" means ignorant!
Uh Huh. does that answer your question anonymous? come out of hiding. state your name.
nice ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ns)
adj. nic·er, nic·est
Pleasing and agreeable in nature: had a nice time.
Having a pleasant or attractive appearance: a nice dress; a nice face.
Exhibiting courtesy and politeness: a nice gesture.
Of good character and reputation; respectable.
Overdelicate or fastidious; fussy.
Showing or requiring great precision or sensitive discernment; subtle: a nice distinction; a nice sense of style.
Done with delicacy and skill: a nice bit of craft.
Used as an intensive with and: nice and warm.
where exactly does it say that "nice" means ignorant? this is from dictionary .com
Wolf, regardless of nice meaning Ignorent or not, you apper to be, If mormonism is a false Gospel, which I get the idea you believe it is, then why do you defend a false religion, a false gospel and not share the truth?. I only glanced over your blog, and the little I saw I was lead to believe, you feel mormonism is incorrect, so If I am wrong please correct me. Rick b
rick b said...
Wolf, regardless of nice meaning Ignorent or not, you apper to be, If mormonism is a false Gospel, which I get the idea you believe it is, then why do you defend a false religion, a false gospel and not share the truth?. I only glanced over your blog, and the little I saw I was lead to believe, you feel mormonism is incorrect, so If I am wrong please correct me. Rick b
August 11, 2006 8:55 PM
where for one, do you get the idea that i think Mormonism is false, so far my comment's have been defending WER62. and as to my finding nice just being what the word states in the dictionary. i won't answer to you about it, as YOU WERE NOT the one that stated the word "nice" also meant ignorant. so answer your question, YOU ARE INCORRECT.
what bolg did you glance over rick? i dont have one. i have only left a few comment's here on wer62 blog for the first time. on a couple of day's
Rick Those that live in Glass houses should not throw stones.
You accuse me of not answering you. How about on your blog. Have you neglected to answer me?
I guess I pushed your buttons.
Testimony of two Ex Mormons - Comments - Comment 6
----------------------------
Wer62 said...
Sheepdog & Rick,
I have an MSN group setup specifically for one on one debates if each party is interested. I just opened it up and no one has debated yet. you guys could be a good test run for me. Just a thought.
Let me know here or on my blog Mormonism - Fact Over Fiction
9:33 AM, August 09, 2006
------
You can see by the date codes that Rick has not answered in two days to my generocity once again. I guess he is afraid to answer to Sheepdog.
Now on to some of the accusations of the LDS not trusting the JOD and Rick and Answering Questions:
First let me state to Rick,
The Burden of Proof still remains in your court to prove that the "Adam God Theory" is Doctrine.
Question 1: Have you proven that fact?
As for "swiss cheese"
Question 2: Have you taken up my challenge to read the Apocrapha in the same light you have read the JOD?
Question 2a: Do you know what the Apocrapha is and why do you keep avoiding this question?
Question 3:
Did you find anything in it that John or Paul was quoted as saying that is or isn't in harmony with scripture in the apocrapha?
Question 4:
Did you know that the King Follets Discourse (at least parts of it) were indoctrinated legitamatly into Doctrine by the process outlined in the link of at the end of the "Adam, God and the Strawman article?
Concerning the JOD for the LDS It is not a matter of trusting the JOD as much as it is about dicernment. You stated I have no proof yet answer this next question
Question 5: Why did you dodge the excerpts I posted from Brigham Young? These also came from the JOD. You only have "one" instance of Brigham Young making a single statement that may have been trascribed wrong verses many other instances of him stating what is considered doctrine by the LDS Church.
Rick, You will answer these questions but I doubt you will not answer them without twisting some context. Something I will give you credit for.
[Roaming This part for you] If you are meaning the things posted in the original article "Adam God and the StrawMan" taking scripture out of context then you are correct, but then again that was the point of the article and using it as a comparison to how NON LDS (specifically those who attack the LDS belief system) use the JOD.
As for following a man - You totally take that out of context of our religoius beliefs. We follow Jesus Christ first and foremost. The Latter-day Saints believe in Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of the Father, who came in the meridian of time, performed his work, suffered the penalty and paid the debt of man's original sin by offering up himself, was resurrected from the dead, and ascended to his Father; and as Jesus descended below all things, so he will ascend above all things.
Do you disagree with the above statement. If so why?
I am done for tonight as it has been a long week.
Thanks to all other posters.
Wer62
gosh WER62. you sound like you could use a good well deserved vacation. i was too busy reading comments that i neglected to extend my hand , i will keep your father and your family in my prayers. may our God give you strength.
Question for Wolf: Is wolf your name. How is wolf any more valid than anonymous? I will try a name.....lets see if this is better.
Just messing around wolf. I hope I didn't offend you.
Anyway, I just keep hoping that the insulting comments on these blogs(all around) could stop. I think that there are more important discussions to have here.
I am sure that people would rather chat about things that have kingdom value.
Have a nice evening.
God Bless!
no longer anonymous. i agree with the insults. i think i hear them coming to (screeching halt)! let's just stick to topic's that are at hand, even if we don't agree, we should learn to keep them in a civil friendly way. ;)
Here's the definitions of nice as from dictionary.com. Please see the bold text. In doing a little research on "kind" vs. "nice," I found the comment in the New American Webster Handy College Dictionary, New Third Edition, first printed in August of 1995.
------------------------
Nice ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ns)
A city of southeast France on the Mediterranean Sea northeast of Cannes. Controlled by various royal houses after the 13th century, the city was finally ceded to France in 1860. It is the leading resort city of the French Riviera. Population: 342,903.
[Download Now or Buy the Book]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
nice ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ns)
adj. nic·er, nic·est
Pleasing and agreeable in nature: had a nice time.
Having a pleasant or attractive appearance: a nice dress; a nice face.
Exhibiting courtesy and politeness: a nice gesture.
Of good character and reputation; respectable.
Overdelicate or fastidious; fussy.
Showing or requiring great precision or sensitive discernment; subtle: a nice distinction; a nice sense of style.
Done with delicacy and skill: a nice bit of craft.
Used as an intensive with and: nice and warm.
Obsolete.
Wanton; profligate: “For when mine hours/Were nice and lucky, men did ransom lives/Of me for jests” (Shakespeare).
Affectedly modest; coy: “Ere... /The nice Morn on th' Indian steep,/From her cabin'd loop-hole peep” (John Milton).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English, foolish, from Old French, from Latin nescius, ignorant, from nescre, to be ignorant. See nescience.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nicely adv.
niceness n.
[Download Now or Buy the Book]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
nice
adj 1: pleasant or pleasing or agreeable in nature or appearance; "what a nice fellow you are and we all thought you so nasty"- George Meredith; "nice manners"; "a nice dress"; "a nice face"; "a nice day"; "had a nice time at the party"; "the corn and tomatoes are nice today" [ant: nasty] 2: socially or conventionally correct; refined or virtuous; "from a decent family"; "a nice girl" [syn: decent] 3: done with delicacy and skill; "a nice bit of craft"; "a job requiring nice measurements with a micrometer"; "a nice shot" [syn: skillful] 4: excessively fastidious and easily disgusted; "too nice about his food to take to camp cooking"; "so squeamish he would only touch the toilet handle with his elbow" [syn: dainty, overnice, prissy, squeamish] 5: noting distinctions with nicety; "a discriminating interior designer"; "a nice sense of color"; "a nice point in the argument" [syn: discriminate] 6: exhibiting courtesy and politeness; "a nice gesture" [syn: courteous, gracious] n : a city in southeastern France on the Mediterranean; the leading resort on the French Riviera [syn: Nice]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
---------------------
Next, I would like to point out that I only said that so that you would know to use the word with caution; regardless of my beliefs, the comment was not directed at any particular person, and I do consider it a slap in the face.
Third, no where in my post did I attack anybody. I simply stated that if those people were godly they would have gone back to the Scriptures to look at the text. I didn't use the JOD at all, so how could I have taken your scriptures out of context without even using it? What I'm seeing is that you're trying to prove that we take the JOD out of context to make you believe that your beliefs are wrong.
Yes, I do disagree with what you posted as the "gospel." Here's why. 1 Corinthians 15 verses 3 through 8 (not separated by verse) states that:
1. Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.
Notice the plural use of the word. So, not the original sin, but for all sins.
2. that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.
The part about the third day seems to have been left out.
3. and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, adn last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
The last part of your statement does not appear in that part of the Scripture, which seems to be the Scripture in which you so horribly tried to use. If you did not intend on using that particular Scripture, then post the Scripture (book, chapter, and verses) that you intended on using.
Roaming Gnome, take it up with bible.com as thats where i got the scriptures from! anything else you have a problem with, take it with them! appearently in your eyes they seem to be nice as well, at bible.com. as to you saying that it was a slap on the face., well imagine how it was like for others reading your definition of"nice'. as other people used it as well. more like a kick in the ass for us i'd say. this is the last posting i will post like this. i apologize to you if my comment's offended you in anyway. you may or may not accept the apology, that is up to you. i did my deed in recognizing my error.
Wolf, To answer you first, Their is a blogger who goes by Wolf's diner. I just thought that was you, just condenseing the name to Wolf. My mistake.
Ed, you said:
Rick Those that live in Glass houses should not throw stones.
You accuse me of not answering you. How about on your blog. Have you neglected to answer me?
Sheepdog & Rick,
I have an MSN group setup specifically for one on one debates if each party is interested. I just opened it up and no one has debated yet. you guys could be a good test run for me. Just a thought.
Let me know here or on my blog Mormonism - Fact Over Fiction
9:33 AM, August 09, 2006
------
You can see by the date codes that Rick has not answered in two days to my generocity once again. I guess he is afraid to answer to Sheepdog.
First off Ed, You accuse me of not answering your Question, but then you End it with, JUST A THOUGHT. So is it a question that needs a answer, or a thought that does not require an answer? Make up your mind. Over all to answer your Question, No I am not looking to engage in an endless debate that will get no where, As to answering Sheepdog, Your not Sheepdog, so dont ask me to answerr you about her reply to me.
Ed you asked
Now on to some of the accusations of the LDS not trusting the JOD and Rick and Answering Questions:
First let me state to Rick,
The Burden of Proof still remains in your court to prove that the "Adam God Theory" is Doctrine.
Question 1: Have you proven that fact?
First off no matter what "Proff" I give you it will never be good enough, In you mind Everything is wrong. Over all their is more than ample evidence on my blog under the two topics p[osted on Adam God, Simply read them over, Otherwise I will just simply cut and paste things I already wrote or was given my another member to post.
Question 2: Have you taken up my challenge to read the Apocrapha in the same light you have read the JOD?
I have no plans on reading it, It is not scripture and As a believer I accept the Bible only, where as mormons believe the 4 standerd works plus the prophets. That is why I use your prophets talks.
Question 2a: Do you know what the Apocrapha is and why do you keep avoiding this question?
Yes I know what it is, and I replyed to your question.
Question 3:
Did you find anything in it that John or Paul was quoted as saying that is or isn't in harmony with scripture in the apocrapha?
It is not Scripture, so I could care less if Paul Quoted from it.
Question 4:
Did you know that the King Follets Discourse (at least parts of it) were indoctrinated legitamatly into Doctrine by the process outlined in the link of at the end of the "Adam, God and the Strawman article?
Yes I know it is Doctrine, Like I said, you agree with the JoD it is Doctrine, you dont agree with it, is is not doctrine.
Concerning the JOD for the LDS It is not a matter of trusting the JOD as much as it is about dicernment. You stated I have no proof yet answer this next question
Question 5: Why did you dodge the excerpts I posted from Brigham Young? These also came from the JOD. You only have "one" instance of Brigham Young making a single statement that may have been trascribed wrong verses many other instances of him stating what is considered doctrine by the LDS Church.
I notice you say (MAY HAVE BEEN TRANSCRIBED WRONG). Do you have proof it was?
Roaming G Stated:
Third, no where in my post did I attack anybody. I simply stated that if those people were godly they would have gone back to the Scriptures to look at the text. I didn't use the JOD at all, so how could I
Wer62 States:
Really.. So what did you mean when you said the following?
"LDS say that they are following Jesus Christ, then why don't you quote the Bible or use it in context to the situation given?"
You say you didn't attack anyone, you say you use the Bible in "context to the Situation"
I ask you Roaming with all plainess: Are you speaking of my original article or are you speaking of LDS in general.
Roaming States:
"Certainly, quoting other men in their walk with God doesn't prove a personal relationship with Jesus."
Wer62 Replies:
I agree. But in the Lords Church he has prophets and apostles teachers and priests who give guidence and can and at times should be quoted. We can quote many good things from many good people. In my writtings I may even quote you or Rick if you have a point that is "good or praiseworthy". The LDS Articles of Faith State "If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."
Roaming G States:
Next, this shows me that those who looked to those people didn't go back to Scripture to see if what they were saying was true. Those that did, would have seen that what they were teaching was false.
This is an attack on Brigham Young and those who were listening to his sermon in the context of this thread. Your judgment/opinion is that he said it and you have judged him to be of less intellengence based any number of other statements that Brigham Young made. Just because you don't believe he was a prophet doesn't neccesarily make it the truth. I believe I stated that one of the possibilities that Brigham Young made that statment, if he made the statement, was to "test" the saints. More likly however is the fact he was simply misquoted in the transcription.
Now Roaming let us address the topic of the word nice. One problem I have is people not using the general meaning of words. If are going to make statements concerning a word such as nice for this type of communication medium we must use the "standard" defintion which is not the Middle English abbriviation of the Latin nescience. If we are going to be able to communicate effectively we must keep to the standard defintions and not throw a monkey wrench in the conversation with defintions of words that are way of base from "normal conversation in the 21st century. I to this moment have no idea why you even brought it up.
There would be no reason to be cautious if we stick to standard language practices for todays society. I will stand behind you that you did not piont this at anyone in particular. The statement could be as easily applied to Rick, your friend, who used the word nice more than anyone in this thread. Let there be no mistake however when you make generalized statements you leave it open to the interpretation of the reader. In this case it seems people took your writtings out of context of what you intended. So who's problem is that. The person who read it or the person who wrote it?
Just a matter of opinion. I examine the comments made on this blog to my original postings. If a valid point is made I may change the verbiage of the original article based on those comments for clarity.
Ed another Reason I Believe BY ment what he said was this. Take the Mormon, Ogden Kraut, I know LDS do not like him or trust him, but he wrote a book called MICHAEL/ADAM it is 170 pages, he quotes from LDS Sources and gives tons of evidence that BY said Adam is God.
But I suspect, you will have reason to discredit him, theirfore all the Evidence he uses will be garbage in your eyes.
Lets add to this, you claim the JoD is not Scripture, theirfore you dont trust BY, But the D and C is SCRIPTURE, Yet LDS deny the D and C 132 teaching of pologamy being an everlasting Covenet for today, sent down by God, Boy no matter how much God Speaks you claim it is false if you dont like it. Well please review Gal 1-verses 6-8.
These Verse talk more about PERVETING THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST, This is exactly what the LDS church does. I know you will disagree, but when you get tossed into the Lake of fire as talked about in the Book of Revelation in the great white throne judgment, you have no one but yourself to blame. No matter how much evidence is given, it is always twisted, unless you agree with it. Rick b
rick b said...
Wolf, To answer you first, Their is a blogger who goes by Wolf's diner. I just thought that was you, just condenseing the name to Wolf. My mistake.
no problem. it's cool.
Post a Comment