Post by: OrkanMan on July 03, 2004, 05:55:00 PM
Post by: Ween311 on July 03, 2004, 05:59:00 PM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 03, 2004, 06:14:00 PM
Ever heard of Ted Dibiase? He was wrestling's Million Dollar Man. I recently listened to him give his testimony at a small church nearby. He is a very, very good public speaker and definetly one of the most interesting people I've ever met in my life. He was very honest and sincere about what has happened in his life and the mistakes he has made in the past. He told of how his life changed and what he's been up to since then, but what really surprised me was the part where he talked about how he travels from city to city giving his testimony. As it turns out, he's back to being an average man. In fact, in his own words, "I'm trying to get my son through college." But, he wants to reach out to young people so much that he is actually willing to pay for all the expenses that it takes to get him from one church to the next. The airfare, hotels, etc. are all coming out of his pocket.
Now I know, he was the Million Dollar Man. But consider this, the church I saw him at only had about 50-75 people in the congregation. It was a very small church. Yet, he still took the time to come and share his testimony.
Now there's a guy who truly believes in his faith in God.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 03, 2004, 06:20:00 PM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 04:36:00 AM
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 05:25:00 AM
Post by: Wolfblade12 on July 04, 2004, 05:27:00 AM
but i like it that you do voluntary work (it is, isnt it?)
good job!
Post by: AnThRaX on July 04, 2004, 07:38:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 4 2004, 08:25 AM) |
| Do you go to one of those churches where they sing, and then some guy says he can heal your broken leg if you donate money to "the church?" |
"I Have THE POWER"
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 08:55:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I've gotta say that people have been expecting the second coming of Christ to be "around the corner" for centuries. |
You're actually right. But, think about this bible verse:
Revelation 1:7 "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen."
Key phrase: "every eye shall see him"
This would never have been possible untill satellites and television was invented.
Post by: Wolfblade12 on July 04, 2004, 09:06:00 AM
it means that everyone CAN (not will) see him, even if you dont believe him, or crucified him.
Post by: iwinulose on July 04, 2004, 10:08:00 AM
but i think its great that u can do good things for people because of wat u believe in
keep up the good work
Post by: Colonel32 on July 04, 2004, 03:18:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I'm sure some of you have logical reasons dealing with issues for not believing in Christianity. What are they? I had a lot, too, but now I can't help but to know with my mind, my heart, and my soul that Jesus Christ is who he says he is..... What are your reasons? |
Because I took Theology and learned too much about it. I couldn't continue to be what I think is illogical. My only problems with religion are War and Creationists. Every other aspect of it is good in my opinion as long as it's not abused or taken literally. Religion should be a philosophy not an ideology - Although Jesus seemed to misunderstand this, I respect Jesus for what he was trying to do.
I believe in A God but not your God...
My God would have nothing to do with scripture like Leviticus
Post by: jesusphreak on July 04, 2004, 03:37:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Because I took Theology and learned too much about it. I couldn't continue to be what I think is illogical. My only problems with religion are War and Creationists. Every other aspect of it is good in my opinion as long as it's not abused or taken literally. Religion should be a philosophy not an ideology - Although Jesus seemed to misunderstand this, I respect Jesus for what he was trying to do. I believe in A God but not your God... My God would have nothing to do with scripture like Leviticus |
So you believe in your own little idea of God....
God in a box????
SO you seem to think that Jesus, despite the absolute impace that he has made on society misunderstood all of this?
He must also have misunderstood who he was.
In John 8, he is quoted as saying, "Before Abraham was, I AM." The man called himself God. Either he was absolutely insane, or he was evil, if he wasn't who he said he was. For you to even follow part of what a mentally insane man or a man who intentionally led thousands astray is crazy in itself......
I really don't think you understand Leviticus. Yes, Leviticus is a bunch of rules, however, I believe there is very good reason for a lot of it. SOme commands (such as to not eat swine) were for health reasons - swine in those days could have bacteria that could kill a person. Infact, you'll find a lot of these laws that seem very restricting were for health reasons, and they were actually very genius.
Other laws that might seem ridiculous today (such as not wearing tatoos, or mixing the fabric in your clothing) were for very good reason. God told the Israelites (I am holy, so you too must be holy). Holy means to be set apart. The Israelites were to be completely different from the nations surrounding them. They were now different, and they were to show this.
Does your god heal broken limbs and the dying, does he change lives 180 degrees, does he give prophecy that literally comes true? Does this god that you want to fit into a box do this kind of stuff? Mine does, and I've seen some of it.....
You will never understand God if you try to define him and learn all you can about him. Christ wanted us to know God in a relational form - to communicate directly with God and to have fellowship with him. You are always gonna run into trouble trying to put an infinite God outside of space and time into this little box that you think suits him right.....
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 04, 2004, 04:01:00 PM
And If you don't beleive in Creation, that is you right. You can easily ignore all the scientific evidence as well as logic offered against Theistic/Athiestic Evolution. Hell, scientists loking for grants and teachers who worship Darwinist thinking all buy into, so why wouldn't the norm be acceptable? Igonrance is bliss, they say.
To jsphreak...
aren't you the one I see on Halo PC (demo) online under "JSFreaK" ?? The one who always says" read the bible!" ?
thx
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 04:23:00 PM
Post by: jesusphreak on July 04, 2004, 04:39:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I think witht the book of Leviticus, as well as some other book sof the old testament,...you would have to take it with a grain of salt. These were accurate with the times. Remember people were still making animal sacrifices, and God had wiped out the entire planet with the great Flood. So what god was trying to do was instruct the people of those days how to live. They didn't have Jesus, nor did they have the holy spirit, plus only the priests could pray as well. |
I tend to agree with all of what you are saying..........
| QUOTE |
| And If you don't beleive in Creation, that is you right. You can easily ignore all the scientific evidence as well as logic offered against Theistic/Athiestic Evolution. Hell, scientists loking for grants and teachers who worship Darwinist thinking all buy into, so why wouldn't the norm be acceptable? Igonrance is bliss, they say. |
There really is a lot of evidence both ways. Also, both sides are a bit biased. It's interesting to note that the Big Bang theory and modern evolutionary theories need some kind of maker.......so...........
Anyway, I tend to see it this way. If you prove that creationism is right, it doesn't mean that it's a Christian God that did the creating. If you prove that evolution is right, it doesn't mean that it's not a Christian God who did the evoloving.
I'm more interested in the aspects of Biblical Christianity that give it a uniqueness that other religions simply cannot match...........
| QUOTE |
| To jsphreak... aren't you the one I see on Halo PC (demo) online under "JSFreaK" ?? The one who always says" read the bible!" ? thx |
No, but I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one!
It seems like there are quite a few Christians on this board........awesome........
| QUOTE |
| Protestants are largely trash, are you sure you've made the right choice about how you're going to follow jesus? |
I would agree with you.......
But I'm no protestant. I am a true believe of Jesus Christ....
It's what a lot of protestants are lacking..........
| QUOTE |
You sir, have been indoctrinated Do you see how you immediately ridicule anything other than what you were taught? |
Excuse me???? I did not ridicule your idea. I questioned it and I brought supporting evidence against it. Don't ever tell me I've been indoctrinated or that I've been taught something. I was not raised in church. I did not become a Christian because it seemed like a good idea. I became a Christianity because that hand of God was very evident in what was happening around me and when the fuzzy feelings wore off and I started really questioning things, I did my research and found Christianity to have more real evidence than any other religion out there..........
| QUOTE |
| My "LITTLE" idea.. you immediately think of it as lesser than your belief and then progress to ridicule it. Is this what Jesus and your church taught you? |
I don't think your idea is little. I'm ridiculing your image of god that you've placed before yourself and claimed as your own as if god is forced to be something that he's not or he is not God.
| QUOTE |
| If I would have said I followed Judaism or Islam would it still be a joke to you... what if I was Pagan... You seem to think Mormons are in a cult so I think anything not Christian to you is wrong. |
There isn't any joking around here. THis is dead serious. I do tend to think that anything outside of biblical Christianity is wrong. It doesn't mean that I devalue you as a person or anything, but I hate the false religions of this world and the restraints they put on man. Do you have a problem with that?
Post by: Colonel32 on July 04, 2004, 05:33:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| There isn't any joking around here. THis is dead serious. I do tend to think that anything outside of biblical Christianity is wrong. It doesn't mean that I devalue you as a person or anything, but I hate the false religions of this world and the restraints they put on man. Do you have a problem with that? |
Yes, I do have a problem with your hate. Religion is an ideology to you. Thats what causes War and the prejudice that you've shown. your belief system has alienated you from over half the world and you refuse to acknowledge the possibility that things might be different than the way you were raised. Would that not be called indoctrination?
Where exactly did Christianity come from...
| QUOTE |
| I became a Christianity because that hand of God was very evident in what was happening around me and when the fuzzy feelings wore off and I started really questioning things, I did my research and found Christianity to have more real evidence than any other religion out there.......... |
Can you describe any of these real differences in comparison to the other religions you studied? What exactly is it about Christianity that is more "real" than say Judiasm. What is the "evidence" that made you choose Christianity over all the other religions.. are your parents Christian?
| QUOTE |
| I don't think your idea is little. I'm ridiculing your image of god that you've placed before yourself and claimed as your own as if god is forced to be something that he's not or he is not God. |
Is that what I did? I said my God wouldn't teach Leviticus. My God wouldn't tell me to slave my daughter...
The only difference between my God and your God is I don't claim to know mine.
Post by: Colonel32 on July 04, 2004, 05:41:00 PM
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 04, 2004, 05:45:00 PM
| QUOTE (jesusphreak @ Jul 4 2004, 07:24 PM) |
| One of my favorite stories that I've heard on the trip is again about Colorado and the Mormon church (which I want everyone to know is not Christianity its a cult). |
You apparently have no idea what the LDS church believes in then do you? They are some of the best people i have associated with. What is not Christian about them?
| QUOTE |
| If the Mormon church could build their temple in view of the whole city, it would just be a sick message. |
What about their message would be sick?
Don't go bashing another religion when you don't know any truth about it. Typical of most protestant christians
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 05:50:00 PM
| QUOTE (Foe-hammer @ Jul 4 2004, 10:45 PM) |
| You apperently have no idea what the LDS church believes in then, do you? They are some of the best people i have associated with. What is not Christian about them? |
They think Jesus came to north america, and the israelites were killed by indians.
Doesn't that sound a little off to you?
Mormons are usually very good people, but their religion is ridiculous, infantile, and much like a cult.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 05:52:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I mean, don't get me wrong, Christians themselves do bad stuff, we aren't perfect, but I think a lot of you have had bad experiences with fake Christianity (you know, the Benny Hinns of this world (you pay me, I'll heal you). That stuff is absolutely fake. |
A couple of years ago, I went to a Benny Hinn crusade in Columbus, Ohio. There were 21,000 people in the arena and I saw first hand how lives were changing in that room.
Let me ask you something...When Benny Hinn invites 21,000 to the front of the arena to pray and accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their savior, is that fake Christianity? When Benny Hinn hands out bibles to anyone who would like one, is that fake Christianity?
Benny Hinn spends 365 days a year traveling the world and telling people about Jesus Christ. How dare you call Benny Hinn a fake Christian.
EDIT: I am commenting on something I've seen first hand. Unlike yourself, I have actually been to a Benny Hinn crusade, enjoyed myself, and came home with a free bible.
Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 "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?
Jesusphreak, I think you're a good person and I don't want to sound mean. So, I hope you take what I say into consideration and don't look at this post as just a flame towards yourself.
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 05:54:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 4 2004, 10:52 PM) |
| Benny Hinn spends 365 days a year traveling the world and telling people about Jesus Christ. How dare you call Benny Hinn a fake Christian. |
I must've missed the part of the gospel where christ sends everyone a bill for his services.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 06:00:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I must've missed the part of the gospel where christ sends everyone a bill for his services. |
What bill? Don't you think it costs money to fly you, your stagecrew, and everyone else that you need? Doesn't it cost money to hold a crusade in a public arena?
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 04, 2004, 06:07:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 5 2004, 02:50 AM) |
| They think Jesus came to north america, and the israelites were killed by indians. Doesn't that sound a little off to you? Mormons are usually very good people, but their religion is ridiculous, infantile, and much like a cult. |
They believe that Christ came to not only the Americas, but visited the rest of world before he ascended to heaven. I don't know how that is so ridiculous or cult like. This is talked about in a book they revere as scripture called the book of Mormon, and mentioned by Christ himself in the bible; something about other sheep that were not of the fold of Jerusalem that he must visit. The Israelites being killed by Indians is off though, I don't know where you heard that from. The book of Mormon does talks about a family of Israelites that sailed to America as directed by the Lord.
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 06:10:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 4 2004, 11:00 PM) |
| What bill? Don't you think it costs money to fly you, your stagecrew, and everyone else that you need? Doesn't it cost money to hold a crusade in a public arena? |
I don't remember the part where jesus needed a stagecrew either...
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 06:18:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Doesn't it cost money to hold a crusade in a public arena? |
Nemt: Why don't you try answering that question?
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 06:20:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 4 2004, 11:18 PM) |
| Nemt: Why don't you try answering that question? |
Yes, it does, but the bible never says you should have a crusade in a public arena.
No one should need to pay to hear the word of god, and anyone charging money for religious services is a cheat, and no christian at all. It's not suprising they're all protestants anyway.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 04, 2004, 06:22:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| No one should need to pay to hear the word of god, and anyone charging money for religious services is a cheat, and no christian at all. It's not suprising they're all protestants anyway. |
Like I said, I've been to a Benny Hinn Crusade. It ddidn't cost me one dime to get in the door.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 04, 2004, 08:14:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| There is a team of people from the ICR right now in Africa trying to "prove" that snakes had vocal chords at one time because they spoke in the garden. Very healthy |
That is an exteme example of a sect of Creationists.
Like all religous groups, each sect follows different doctrines.
Some Creationists believe the big bang was God's creation model. Interpreting "6 days" as (m/b)illions of years.
You could call this diversity in belief reason to doubt all religion, however, all christians DO agree on a fundamental doctrine... that Salvation comes through Jesus Christ.
However we got here, we need to focus on why we are here, and what is my purpose. This is what we all ask ourselves at some point in time. Am I on a spinning rock hurtling through space, with no purpose? Or is there a loving creator who has a plan for me?
Post by: jesusphreak on July 04, 2004, 09:43:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Yes, I do have a problem with your hate. Religion is an ideology to you. Thats what causes War and the prejudice that you've shown. your belief system has alienated you from over half the world and you refuse to acknowledge the possibility that things might be different than the way you were raised. Would that not be called indoctrination? |
Settle down, buddy. I'm not hating here. I'm disagreeing. Religion is not an ideology to me; it is my life. Christ himself said, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself, carry his cross, and follow me".
I've already told you, I was not raised a CHristian. I became one a few years ago. I've not alienated myself from half the world. You'll find that Christianity is today breaking chains that have lasted for thousands of years (the Hindu caste system which sets some people as "Untouchables" and makes them clean sewers and die of leprosy). I think CHristianity is going out into the world and trying to change it.
| QUOTE |
Where exactly did Christianity come from... |
Christianity came from roots dating far back into the Jewish religion. As early as Genesis 3,
"15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring [1] and hers;
he will crush [2] your head,
and you will strike his heel."
Even the Jews of Christ's day saw this as a prophecy of the Messiah.
Look at Psalm 22.
This is a picture of the cross.
Micah 5:2 says, "But out of you Bethlehem, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come one who will be for me a ruler of all Israel, whose origins are from ancient days".
Bethlehem was the setting of Christ's birth.
Zechariah 9:9
"9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion!
Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem!
See, your king [2] comes to you,
righteous and having salvation,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey."
Ironic that Christ came into Jerusalem riding on a donkey?
Zechariah 12:10 -
10 "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit [1] of grace and supplication. They will look on [2] me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.
God is speaking in this verse. Is it strange that he says that they will mourn for the one they have pierced???? God being pierced? When did that happen?
Isiaiah 53 -
"4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions (sins),
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all."
This is the very gospel of Jesus Christ.
NOW, what you must understand is that every single quote I just gave you is from the Old Testament (ie. before Christ). Most from tradition are stated to be before 400 BC (400 years before Christ), but even if you don't believe that, the Dead Sea scrolls are dated to 200 - 150 years BC (and they contain the entire Old Testament except for the book of Esther).
Therefore, we have direct prophecies about who the Messiah must be. He must be born in Bethlehem, he comes from the tribe of Judah, he enters Jerusalem on a donkey, he dies for the sins of the people, etc, etc....
So, how could Jesus decided where he was to be born at? How could he have decided his exact way of death? He couldn't have....
The only other option you get is that some clever Jews got together, pieced together a story from all these prophecies, and then went out and preached this fake lie that they knew to be a lie to the result of their repeated imprisonment, beatings, and eventual martyrdom (11 of the 12 disciples were executed). History tells us that these men gained nothing for doing this. Not only this, but their preaching started in a Jerusalem, the city a size of a small town these days where everyone could have known whether or not the story was true or not. Yet somehow, this fake story spread throughout not only Israel, but throughout the Roman Empire (under intense persecution) and became the predominant religion by 300 AD.
| QUOTE |
Can you describe any of these real differences in comparison to the other religions you studied? What exactly is it about Christianity that is more "real" than say Judiasm. What is the "evidence" that made you choose Christianity over all the other religions.. are your parents Christian? |
The very basic difference is in every other single religion except Biblical Christianity, you have to gain your "salvation" or "nirvana" through your own work and through you being good. Biblical Christianity is literally the only religion that says that you cannot do it that way, you have to let God save you. Religion is man reaching out to God, Christianity is God reaching out to man.
But then you could very simply look at other religions. Islam? Muhammad led many military expeditions in his lifetime to expand his religion and to destory the infidels. The Koran is very clear that Muhammad believed that Christians and Jews were infidels and were to be killed if they did not convert. Did Muhammad have something to gain? Yes, he sure did....
Buddhism? This is not as much a religion as a way of life. Buddha never claimed to be god, he never claimed there was a god, and he never claimed anything concerning the state of things. While Buddhism does work (physically your body relaxes and feels good due to the many different ways of Buddhism), but Buddhism answers no questions, and it doesn't try to. It also doesn't show itself in anyway to be divine.
Mormonism? Joseph Smith, who gained many wives, a lot of wealth and fanatical devotion? Joseph Smith the liar who said many, many things that never came true?
I've already covered them. The Book of Mormon is an absolute fraud and Mormonism itself, while producing hard workers and nice people also produces absolute ignorance (I've talked to their missionaries, when I tried to ask questions I was immediately accused of "persecuting the saints"), and it is just like any other religion, you work your way into heaven.
Hinduism? 300 million gods and counting. Gandhi himself, a devout Hindu, said "truth is god". Hinduism has absolutely no problem contradicting itself, but that doesn't matter because according to it, reality is what you make it. My chair I'm sitting in is true, is it god? No. You'll find that Hinduism is creating more shackles than it is freedom.
I'm sorry for being harsh, but I do not hate you, and I do not hate people of other religions. I hate these barriers that hold us down and are slowly killing people all over the world. Jesus claimed that he was "the way, the truth, and the life." He also said, "No one comes to the Father except through me". He was very exclusive in his statements. There isn't room for other religions. There is room for people in Christianity, but there isn't room for other religion when we could all die tommorrow.
| QUOTE |
Is that what I did? I said my God wouldn't teach Leviticus. My God wouldn't tell me to slave my daughter... |
You are taking that way out of context, and you also need to understand that the world of 2000 years ago was much different than the world of today. Leviticus is not intended to apply to us today.
The only difference between my God and your God is I don't claim to know mine.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 04, 2004, 09:54:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| but they also believe that Jesus is Satan's brother |
True, but in the sense that all of Gods children are brothers and sisters, and Lucifer was also one of Gods spirits but fell (Morning star).
| QUOTE |
| They believe in salvation by works (ie. you can work your way into heaven). |
Not true. They believe in salvation by grace (Christ Atonement), after all one can do. This does make more logic to me then death bed repentance. "Faith without works is dead".
| QUOTE |
| Joseph Smith also has a court order from New York state on the charge of looking into a stone to tell the future. |
It was called the uramin in thumum (sp?). He used it to aide him in translating the book of mormon from off of gold plates.
| QUOTE |
| The Book of Mormon itself has absolutely no credence in modern archaelogy. It has gone over many many changes in its text in the 170 years its been in publication. |
The only changes i noticed were grammatical. No points of their doctrine were changed. I have studied the LDS faith for some time now (quite interesting), and have compared 1890 and present editions of the book. If you want to talk about changes, the bible has been through many translations, and messed with during the early days of catholicism.
| QUOTE |
| Mormonism itself is a direct copy of Islam. God calls his "prophet" to reform something messed up. He sees an angel (both instances Gabriel), receives a revelation and receives new "scripture". |
The angle was called Moroni, not Gabriel that visited Joseph Smith. God has always used prophets and apostles to run his kingdom when the church was on the earth. Question is why are there not any prophets and apostles today?
Post by: jesusphreak on July 04, 2004, 10:17:00 PM
http://www.carm.org/lds/compare.htm
Also, here is an interesting page looking att the changes in the Book of Mormon:
http://www.carm.org/...bom_changes.htm
Post by: jesusphreak on July 04, 2004, 10:23:00 PM
Post by: cainedna on July 04, 2004, 11:17:00 PM
In the 40 Objections part of the site, number 36 concerns the idea that the new testament was written so it would look as though Jesus fulfilled prophecy. The author makes the argument that the apostles suffered for their beliefs, and that it would be illogical for them to lie.
1. I might be wrong, but I recall hearing that the chronological order of the different books of the new testament gradually brought Jesus to become less of a philosopher into a prophet, and eventually into the divine embodiment he is known as today.
This could imply that his ideas were either procedurally idealized (as does happen with martyrs,) or that his teachings were being dressed up to be more appealing. There are plenty of instances of this happening over the years with Christianity, including the date of Christmas and Easter, the Christmas tree, and countless other fusions with other customs and faiths.
2. It doesn't address the fact that many records of the apostles are no longer available, due to editions, lost records, or the distinct possibility of blatantly self-contradictory records. This point isn't exactly evidence, but it's certainly a big loose end.
On top of that, he doesn't do a lot to disprove agnosticism, simply atheism. The closest he does is a few scripted conversations pointing to the outcome he desires. I found a number of points that I've always felt as a basis of not believing in Christianity that never got addressed. They were simply glossed over in a way to make it seem like he'd made an airtight argument.
I feel the fact is that there is no airtight argument for Christianity (in whatever incarnation) that doesn't involve a leap of faith. Of course, it's still interesting to toss ideas like this back and forth.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 05, 2004, 12:43:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Yes, but have you read of the thief on the cross? If you wanna talk about death bed atonement, there it is..... |
Christ said he would be with him in paradise. Paradise doesn't necessarily mean exaltation.
| QUOTE |
| Go back to the earliest texts of the New Testament and the Dead Sea Scrolls and you will find that the modern day Bible is VERY similar to it. |
Yes it is close, but there are greater discrepancies found in the bible (mainly on baptism) then ones you gave me the link to on the book of mormon (there still was not any doctrinal discrepancies, mainly grammatical, and the father and the son being one, which they believe are one in the same, just three separate personages.).
| QUOTE |
| This court order is from several years before the Book of Mormon was ever published. |
The book of mormon wasn't published tell 1830, joseph smith started translating the plates 1821. So he was using the sear stone well before the book was published; not to tell the future.
| QUOTE |
| Mormonism straight up still isn't Biblical. |
That is your opinion, and i believe otherwise.
Also, you keep bringing up the subject of mormons believing that they can work their way into heaven. This is completely false. They do believe that works is very important, but no matter how many good works a person does while they are alive, if it were not for christ atonement they could not be saved, because christ paid for the sins of all humankind. But if someone does evil all their days, and does not repent (repentance requires more then just confessing your sins, it requires a godly sorrow and a change of heart and actions), then christ's atonement will have no effect on that individual. Read the book of James again, and then maybe you'll understand what i'm talking about.
Again, try not bashing other religions that you obviously do not understand (try not learning about the LDS faith from just your preacher and anti-moron literature). It is quite hypocritical (pharacies and sagecies during Christs time were a good example of this).
Post by: nemt on July 05, 2004, 04:29:00 AM
Post by: Banj on July 05, 2004, 04:47:00 AM
Post by: nemt on July 05, 2004, 05:54:00 AM
| QUOTE (Banj @ Jul 5 2004, 09:47 AM) |
| ......but not quite as rediculous as your sweeping statements. |
Point out one thing ridiculous OR sweeping about my statements?
Post by: Banj on July 05, 2004, 07:50:00 AM
Post by: cainedna on July 05, 2004, 08:44:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| The thing is, you'll find a very concrete set of beliefs by 50 AD (long within the range of avoiding legenday occurances and getting false memories). |
I certainly don't think 50 years is too short a time for things to be blown out of proportion. Especially when you imagine the time period. I'm only trying to point out how there's certainly a possibility of it being exaggerated accounts.
| QUOTE |
| I don't think its the best thing to do in proving another religion false. I will definitely point out whats wrong with it, but you are gonna have a hard time proving its false to anyone (although it is possible). |
That's actually one of the points of agnosticism, is that it's not a religion. I certainly have no sacred cows to defend, I simply don't see any compelling evidence towards Christianity or any other religion.
| QUOTE |
| I tend to think more importantly how Christianity is practiced today and there are supernatural things going on that cannot be explained by conventional science. One you reach the point of realizing that there are things going on in this world which we cannot explain, it is most important to show that Christianity is the only religion that shows itself divine through its many exact prophecies that came to pass (Messianic and historical) and how the Bible is in tune with modern archaelogy..... |
There are a lot of things that were never explainable without the bible, which have been proven otherwise throughout history. I know how often this is brought up, but it's true.
While you can look at the bible, and see how through hindsight some things have proven it to be true, you can interpret the book in so many ways it's truly absurd.
I'd like to see some bit of scripture that had a well-documented modern outcome, that wasn't ambiguous in nature.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 08:57:00 AM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 05, 2004, 09:51:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Religion is just a cushion for the mind of those who cannot comprehend that not everything is comprehendable. |
We may not be able to see God, but there is undeniable proof that (some form of) God exists:
An atom is the smallest component of an element. Therefore, everything in the whole entire universe is composed of atoms.
If the world started from one single atom, where did the atom come from? It had to of been put there by some divine presence because there is no other explanation for it. If you don't believe in God, you must believe in magic.
To not believe in the Trinity (God, The Son, and the Holy Spirit) is one thing. But to not believe there is a God is something totally different.
But heh, that's just my opinion so please don't harass me for it.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 09:56:00 AM
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 09:59:00 AM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 05, 2004, 10:03:00 AM
Look at child birth for example. When you think about it, the whole process of a baby growing and being born is absolutely amazing.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 05, 2004, 10:14:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| In most religions there is the belief that God allows free will. If that were correct, then I would be able to think for myself. But if you ponder that for awhile, who then puts the thoughts in my head? If god doesn't put them there, then they must come out of SOMEWHERE. But why? If a thought can pop into my head out of nowhere, then an atom can be created from nothing by no one. |
I think I understand what you are trying to say.
But in fact, aren't all our decisions made for specific reasons? For example you see a sign at a Zoo saying "Don't Feed the Bears". Using thoughts and ideas which you already have inside your brain from past experiences you would resolve (hopefully!) not to feed the bears because of dangers you have already had hardwired into your brain during your growth... which you absorbed growing up to learn what is good for you and what is not.
Say too, that you have the thought of beating the living crap out of someone who did you wrong. It is a sense a justice which you also gained during the growth process of what is wrong towards you should not go unanswered, just as you might have been upset when a sibling was favoured, you kicked and screamed till you got what you want.
Basically your brain is a extremely well designed computer which can process any thought. After all, a thought can be inspired by your expereinces. It's hard argue on things which aren't material or physical of course.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:16:00 AM
It is also amazing at the things people can come up with to compete with their ignorance. Don't take this as an insult at all, but sometimes it's just the amazing things that end up working, sometimes it's not. Giving life can be amazing, but the ways it can be taken away are just the opposite.
I am what I am because we are, there needs no reason for it.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:22:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| But in fact, aren't all our decisions made for specific reasons? For example you see a sign at a Zoo saying "Don't Feed the Bears". Using thoughts and ideas which you already have inside your brain from past experiences you would resolve (hopefully!) not to feed the bears because of dangers you have already had hardwired into your brain during your growth... which you absorbed growing up to learn what is good for you and what is not. |
Now if you think about that. That would mean someone's original thought, would have to be the result of some experience. Which would mean following your theory, that one original past experience spawned that of all humanities. Now that statement right there would defeat the rule of free-will considering that if god was that original past experience, he would then have affected all of humanity with that thought and therefore, there would technically be no free-will.
Things can still happen because they do. What do you call the space between atoms, what created that then? Wasn't that just always there? The idea that god was not created by anything, makes my statement just as true, something CAN just be for no reason at all.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 05, 2004, 10:23:00 AM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 05, 2004, 10:24:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| In most religions there is the belief that God allows free will. If that were correct, then I would be able to think for myself. But if you ponder that for awhile, who then puts the thoughts in my head? If god doesn't put them there, then they must come out of SOMEWHERE. But why? If a thought can pop into my head out of nowhere, then an atom can be created from nothing by no one. |
A thought is not physical. It's not something you can feel, touch, hear, taste or smell. But since we each can think for ourselves, we know that thoughts do exist.
If I was an expert on brain activity, I might be able to explain how thoughts work. There is probably a scientific explanation for why thoughts pop into people's heads.
But, there is no scientific explanation for why an atom magically appears.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:29:00 AM
There is also no scientific way to explain why there has to be a god. There is no scientific way to explain that if there is a god, what god looks like, how god thinks, what god knows, who god is.
Science isn't perfect either because it is man made as well. We only know what we want to know. Things could just as possibly appear out of nowhere, as to someone has to believe that someone else put them there.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:34:00 AM
Folklore was the same as religion is, it's just a way to comprehend something until we know the truth. When we were little, we believed everything in folklore's as did the ancient civilizations. We just know now that it is ridiculous because it's been proven false. Until religion is proven false, people will continue to believe it.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:48:00 AM
When you see someone, a great person, the best you ever met, killed for no reason at all, would that still be Christianity at it's best? Are you even open to ANY other religions at all. There have been many civilizations that have been JUST FINE believing in either no god, or a billion different gods, that I am sure have been through the same exact thing as you have.
Have YOU ever tried believing in something else than Christianity and god, and see if anything in the world changes? If sky's come crashing down, and humans ceasing to exist? Why don't you try that as well.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 05, 2004, 11:24:00 AM
We welcome all no matter what Creed, color or race...
I think you all should too.
Respect his beliefs, and he'll respect yours.
Mr. Chips
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 11:25:00 AM
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 05, 2004, 11:27:00 AM
NO
SO
WELCOME HIM< NO ONE ELSE HAS
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 11:36:00 AM
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 01:17:00 PM
Post by: Colonel32 on July 05, 2004, 04:50:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| In the 40 Objections part of the site, number 36 concerns the idea that the new testament was written so it would look as though Jesus fulfilled prophecy. The author makes the argument that the apostles suffered for their beliefs, and that it would be illogical for them to lie. |
Your asking all the right questions in my opinion Caidena
There is a large debate in the Christian faith whether or not prophecies were fulfilled - The answer depends what church you go to. The arguments themselves are hard to understand to say the least, but there is three main beliefs...Dispensationalism and Old vs New Covenant theology. It goes from there into the whole "greater Israel" argument. Everything is just interpretation so even within a faith there is debate as to who is correct. It's a question that can't really be answered correctly in my opinion
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 11:13:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| If you look hard enough...The thing you'll find is a lot of the Christianity you know, came from 500 years before Jesus. Mithraism cults pre-dated Christianity and Christianity certainly adopted the Zorastrianism and Gnosticism beliefs of good an evil. Your holy trinity, 12 apostles and dates of importance were all a part of Mithraism cults. It's more than Gen 3 Jesus was a Jewish revolutionary before he was annointed Christos. He was not put to death for your sins, it was Roman law for Revolutionists. The "substitutionary theory of the atonement" was the idea of Paul. |
Mithraism does not predate Christianity. You are absolutely wrong on that. And Gnosticism in itself is a corruption of Christianity, therefore it must have come from after the start of Christianity. Zorastianism, yes it does predate Christianity by a lot, does that mean Christianity copied it? No. Is it not possible that that religion was somewhat inspired and had a closer view of God than other religions? Yes, it is. And just maybe the reason Zorastianism is not a global religion today is because it's followers realized that CHristianity was the real thing. Just a thought.
| QUOTE |
Your asking all the right questions in my opinion Caidena There is a large debate in the Christian faith whether or not prophecies were fulfilled - The answer depends what church you go to. The arguments themselves are hard to understand to say the least, but there is three main beliefs...Dispensationalism and Old vs New Covenant theology. It goes from there into the whole "greater Israel" argument. Everything is just interpretation so even within a faith there is debate as to who is correct. It's a question that can't really be answered correctly in my opinion |
I disagree strongly on that. Yes, CHristians disagree on a fulfillment of prophecies, but what they are disagreeing on is future prophecy (ie end times prophecy). You will not find a CHristian on the face of the earth that does not agree on the MEssianic prophecies.....
There is a lot of disagreement in the CHristian faith, but what holds us together in our solid belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, met all of the requirements of the Messiah, and then died on the cross, and rose again.
I think the CHristian arguement that it is illogical for the apostles to know of the validity of a lie and to go and die for it is very solid. Yes, there are martyrs of other faiths today, but that's just it, they are dying for their faith.
The apostles would have known whether or not the story that they were telling was true, and for them to preach it, get beat for it, live like beggars for it, and to die for it is something astounding.
What 12 men do you know that will die for an absolute lie (that they know to be a lie)?
Post by: Prodak on July 06, 2004, 11:30:00 AM
God exists, Jesus exists, and Jesus is the Son of God.
He died because thats why he came for. To save people from sin, to restore the relationship with the Father, or GOD.
Yo know nothing about sacrifice, the real love is giving yourself, including your life for the ones you love. Thats love and Jesuschrist loved the whole world. People from the past, from the present and from the future, He loved all of us.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 11:46:00 AM
Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression [1] and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken. [2]
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [3] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life [4] and be satisfied [5] ;
by his knowledge [6] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, [7]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, [8]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
Why, unless of course they were looking for THE MESSIAH, not just the messiah of Israel, but the Messiah of the world. This is where Jews fail today, they think that the Messiah is their Messiah, and then the worlds, but really, he is the Messiah of us all.
Did god not say to Abraham, "You will be the father of many nations?"
What nations could he be speaking of besides Israel if he is not speaking of the world?
Really, I don't think you have any true arguement against Christianity unless you have read and studied the vast majority of the Bible yourself. If you haven't you don't know the context of it, and you don't understand it. So please, if you really want to know for yourself if its right or wrong, please read it for yourself and quit listening to what people who are straight out biased against it have to say.
A great example is Sir William Ramsey who lived in the 19th century. He was a famous archaelogist intent on using the Book of Acts as a guidebook to excavating and to proving that it was false. He returned home 20 years later, a Christian, and in reference to the author of Acts (Luke), he had this to say, "he was a historian of the highest rank".
A man intent to disprove the Bible by what it actually said (instead of what others said), ended up finding out that the evidence for it actually backed it up to a T and he ended up becoming a Christian himself.
Stop just saying things and actually read the Bible. You will then know if its got truth behind it or not.......................
In reference to someone else's question, why haven't I tried out other religions? Why should I? After me being an agnostic and not really knowing of a certain God existing or not, and after doing some hardcore studying and seeing how much Christianity was validated by history and archaelogy and after seeing these amazing prophecies and on top of that after seeing actual events in my life that were straight up near impossible, why would I try and other religion? Can you show me something more real than that? No, you can't, and until you've humbled yourself before the creator of the universe (whoever he is), you'll never know for yourself.
I'd rather spend a few weeks of my life trying to honestly and actually determine if it was true than to spend an eternity in somewhere I don't want to be just because I was lazy or I thought I knew everything......
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 06, 2004, 11:51:00 AM
Notice how he didn't make any statements of his own? All he did was create confusion by trying to understand what smart people know and he doesn't. Not just cuz we're christian but cuz he's not. Just look at what he said about my "feed the bears" comment.
And if he is athiest like he led us to beleive, ...well it's better that we don't try to argue with him, most of them don't want to be held accountable for the sins. He only wants to flame us..if he does want to ask some serious questions and he is searching he is welcome back. However, it looks like someone banned him, he has "0 posts" under his username.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 06, 2004, 12:00:00 PM
| QUOTE (jesusphreak) |
| Why, unless of course they were looking for THE MESSIAH, not just the messiah of Israel, but the Messiah of the world. This is where Jews fail today, they think that the Messiah is their Messiah, and then the worlds, but really, he is the Messiah of us all. |
Be careful how you word that. Saying all modern Jews have failed is very dangerous. There is a group called Messaic Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah prephecied about. It is a growing beleif among modern Jewish people. I met one once.
One thing I have never understood is how they achieve pennace for the sins. The old testament instructs them to perform animal sacrifices! Yet we do not see that today... why?
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:00:00 PM
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:03:00 PM
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 06, 2004, 12:06:00 PM
Flaming again?Think on my own, you say? How could I do that, thoughts don't exist, after all!
talk to ya later, im going out, maybe you could siimmer down till then? thank you looking forward to it!
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:09:00 PM
Why don't you stop taking everything as an insult for one second and start thinking.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 12:12:00 PM
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 12:23:00 PM
12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.
13 And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter"-the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD to the potter.
Hmmm.....
Wait a second. Do the gospels not tell us that Judas was paid 30 pieces of silver for the death of Christ?????
Even if you don't believe this, why in the heck is again the Jewish God (immutable, eternal, outside of time and space), speaking of himself as being priced????
Especially for 30 pieces of silver: the same price of Jesus Christ!!!
Remember, Zechariah is a part of the Old Testament, necessarily dated at the very least to 200 years before Christ's time, but in tradition said to be 400 years.
200 years, 400 years, what does it matter? Is it still not amazing for a prophecy like this to happen a year before the thing happens????
How were these Jews in exile so wise about the future????
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:27:00 PM
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 12:29:00 PM
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:30:00 PM
Post by: jesusphreak on July 06, 2004, 12:34:00 PM
Yet you won't take the time to look at and read what I've said.
You'd rather stick your tongue out and say na-na-na-na-boo-boo......
I'm asking you to honestly consider what I've said instead of immediately taking offense to it............
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 12:35:00 PM
Post by: bluedeath on July 06, 2004, 01:04:00 PM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 06, 2004, 03:55:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| How Christ-like. |
No, you're completely wrong. Jesus Christ was absolutely perfect. As Christians, we go to church, read our bible, and pray so that we can be more like him.
Post by: nemt on July 06, 2004, 04:52:00 PM
| QUOTE (Banj @ Jul 5 2004, 12:50 PM) |
| ...."the vile abomination of Islam.", you are a tool. |
I'd rather be a "tool" than blinded by lies.
Islam is a religion of war, hatred, and xenophobia. Not all muslims have these traits, but that is the lifestyle and culture their scriptures preach.
No other major religion preaches the destruction of all other forms of worship, and conversion by sword. No other religion specifically instructs followers not to befriend anyone of another faith.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 06, 2004, 05:09:00 PM
Post by: bluedeath on July 06, 2004, 05:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 7 2004, 12:55 AM) |
| No, you're completely wrong. Jesus Christ was absolutely perfect. As Christians, we go to church, read our bible, and pray so that we can be more like him. |
Seeking Irony -
Thus the phrase "How Christ-Like" normally someone who testifies of Christ is seeking to be Christ-Like. This person testifies of Christ yet makes no effort to display Christ-like patience nor humility.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 06, 2004, 06:08:00 PM
The phrase "How Christ-Like", in my experience, is often used by people who do not share the same faith as Christians. I guess it's their way to provoke the person claiming to be a Christian even though they most certainly have to know that Christians have the same faults, weaknesses, and temptations as everybody else.
Christians do not claim to be perfect people. But like I said, we go to church, read the bible, and pray so that we can become better Christians...and better people too.
Post by: bluedeath on July 06, 2004, 06:46:00 PM
| QUOTE (jesusphreak @ Jul 6 2004, 09:44 PM) |
| I AM NOT PROVING OTHER RELIGIONS WRONG! Are you really that dense? Would you stop spouting stuff off???? |
Sooo this is Christ-Like?
Post by: nemt on July 06, 2004, 07:21:00 PM
| QUOTE (cainedna @ Jul 6 2004, 10:52 PM) |
| My point was just the comparison of the Islamic Empire (known to have spared "people of the book," or Jews and Christians) with the Crusades (kill anyone who doesn't worship Jesus like we do.) |
Muslims have been murdering christians and jews for centuries, don't give into the lies.
Were muslims killed in the crusades? Yes. It's insulting and wrong to compare the crusades to the kind of war muslims bring to the world, though. First off, the bible never says to force conversion upon anyone, or to kill anyone, whereas the koran does. Also, the crusades were legitimate wars to regain occupied holy land, not a murderous land grab.
Post by: nemt on July 06, 2004, 07:51:00 PM
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jul 7 2004, 12:36 AM) |
| Have you even read the Koram? |
The Koram? No, but I have read the Koran, and you haven't. You have an assumption based on the politically correct image of islam the media feeds you. The Koran incites hatred and violence, the torah doesnt and the bible doesnt, no holy book does like the Koran does, and no one who's read it could logically compare the crusades to any of the horror islam has unleashed on the world.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 06, 2004, 08:45:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Mozart.mp3- You've gotta hold off on the rough posts there. We're all civil here (mostly .) |
Aye, but you never said I was wrong! :-)
Post by: OrkanMan on July 07, 2004, 03:35:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| The Koram? No, but I have read the Koran, and you haven't. You have an assumption based on the politically correct image of islam the media feeds you. The Koran incites hatred and violence, the torah doesnt and the bible doesnt, no holy book does like the Koran does, and no one who's read it could logically compare the crusades to any of the horror islam has unleashed on the world. |
Nemt, I couldn't have said it better myself. You are exactly right.
Post by: therebelious1 on July 07, 2004, 04:43:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| deaf and blind and dumb, and born to follow |
Post by: OrkanMan on July 07, 2004, 05:40:00 AM
therebelious1: Believe it or not, we do care about you.
Post by: moistness on July 07, 2004, 08:56:00 AM
Post by: therebelious1 on July 07, 2004, 09:31:00 AM
if it werent for the christians, christianity might be a good idea
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 11:52:00 AM
| QUOTE ("Exodus 32:27-28") |
And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, [and] go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men |
Jesus said to the crowd at Zacchaeus' house:
| QUOTE ("Luke 19:27") |
| "Bring my enemies here and slay them in my presence." |
Jesus expresses an almost psychopathic hatred for Jezebel.
| QUOTE ("Revelation 2:23") |
"I will kill her children." |
Every man take up arms?
| QUOTE ("Luke 22:36") |
"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one". |
Jesus came only for the jews, that is all he will save?
| QUOTE ("Matthew 15:22-24") |
"And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel". |
I'm not trying to start or fuel a religious war. My point is, don't bash someone elses beliefs when yours can be said to have the same flaws.
PS. Collected from various sources, I can't take credit for finding them
Post by: cainedna on July 07, 2004, 01:18:00 PM
Post by: nemt on July 07, 2004, 04:32:00 PM
| QUOTE (Some a-hole) |
| Nemt, I said it before and I'll say it again, pointing out typos is not a proper rebuttal. |
You're correct, which is why I went on to disprove everything he said after I pointed out his typo. Seriously, put down your lyndon larouche pamphlet, or whatever's got you preoccupied and pay attention to everything people say before you criticize them.
| QUOTE (Some a-hole) |
| I have read the Qur'an, not that it matters to you (you've never been known for distinguising fact from fiction). Honestly, the only image the media feeds is that Muslims are all terrorists (one you seem to thrive on). |
No, you didn't read the koran. If you had, you wouldn't dispute it's hateful, xenophobic theme. The media has never portrayed all muslims as terrorists, what are you talking about? The media spouts off so much bullshit about not all muslims believing in terrorism, and islam being a religion of peace, that it's starting to break up the ozone. Maybe in TEL AVIV it's different, but in the USA, that's what you get. 100% Crescent News Network.
| QUOTE (Some a-hole) |
| The bible is as much a tool to violent acts as Islamic teachings, it's your bias alone that makes the difference in your mind. It shameful how elitist some people are when it comes to religion (well, just about anything for that matter). |
Now you've just proven you've never read the bible either. The bible never says to kill anyone or force anyone to convert. The bible never says to hunt down nonbelievers. I also liked how you threw in the part about my "bias," despite myself being non-religious. Way to go, jackass, keep it and maybe you could be a speechwriter for one of the clintons.
| QUOTE (Some a-hole) |
| The crusade could be labeled as a horror as easily as Islamic expansion, and why stop there? Look at the christian occupation of Africa. If that's not forcing faith... Some morals. |
Were you smoking crack while you wrote this? In every african nation with muslims and christians, the christians are oppressed and murdered while the UN turns a blind eye. Look at Sudan.
You make me sick with your biased, ignorant attitude and perception. There's no reason to even continue this, when you start to make things up out of the blue.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 07, 2004, 04:36:00 PM
I wouldn't be spending my time here if I didn't care about you guys. The only reason I tell you guys about Jesus Christ is because he's changed my life and he's absolutely real and he's brought so much to my life and turned the ordinary into extraordinary.
I don't want to be corny, but Jesus Christ loves every single one of you, and he's got a plan for you. ALl you've got to do is give him a chance.
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 04:44:00 PM
You have to understand, other religions will see you as just that, someone who's been spoonfed lies, brainwashed. You aren't going to convince many people, because they all have the same conviction that you do. People don't mind you talking about your religion, what they do mind is you preaching it to them.
Post by: nemt on July 07, 2004, 04:46:00 PM
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 04:51:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 8 2004, 01:46 AM) |
| The only "brainwashed" people here are the ones who trust the media when it says muslims are all cuddly and nice, and islam is a peaceful faith. The facts are all in the book, for anyone to see. |
Nemt, no one wants to hear your crusade-mongering. Well, maybe Orkin.
If you feel the need to continually denounce groups of people based on your hostile and biased interpretation of their religion, join your peers at the nearest klan charter.
I don't see any war mongering muslims around here, so the only "brainwashed" person is you.
Post by: nemt on July 07, 2004, 04:52:00 PM
| QUOTE (HeLiuM @ Jul 7 2004, 09:51 PM) |
| I don't see any war mongering muslims around here, so the only "brainwashed" person is you. |
Not all muslims support the radical filth the koran is built upon, just like not all catholics go to church on the first friday of every month, it doesn't mean that's not part of the faith.
Islam is built on hatred and xenophobia, no other major religion is, and you can't prove otherwise.
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 05:00:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 8 2004, 01:52 AM) |
| Not all muslims support the radical filth the koran is built upon, just like not all catholics go to church on the first friday of every month, it doesn't mean that's not part of the faith. Islam is built on hatred and xenophobia, no other major religion is, and you can't prove otherwise. |
You can't prove it is. Seriously, do you AIM to offend as many people as possible? I'm not asking you to censor yourself, PC is a joke, but you're downright prejudiced. Islam, like any religion, is in the eye of the beholder, built on similiar morals as Christianity, and you can't prove otherwise. I know many muslims (who definately wouldn't appreciate you calling their holy book radical filth), none show the xenophobia you are showing right here.
I think you just like the attention.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 07, 2004, 05:00:00 PM
What does Peter say????
1 Peter 3:15-16
15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
Just a thought, brother.....
Post by: nemt on July 07, 2004, 05:01:00 PM
"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190)
You see, this is why you brainwashed liberals never win, history, facts, and the truth are never on your side.
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 05:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 8 2004, 02:01 AM) |
| I don't need to prove it, the koran proves it for me. History proves it for me. "Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190) You see, this is why you brainwashed liberals never win, history, facts, and the truth are never on your side. |
You still haven't proven a thing... This is a religious book, not a science textbook. Like any other uncontestable writing (including novels), you can't rightfully claim to absolutely know the meaning, or what the interpretation SHOULD be. The Koran serves the same purpose as the Bible, it is something to be interpreted to help you make life decisions.
As for the liberal comment, you're right! All hail Nemt, the broken propaganda machine that noone knows how to turn off. I'm done with your pointless insults, dodging around the point. Leave them out of your next post, or don't expect a reply.
and jesusphreak, Islam means to submission to Allah. Much like you with yours.
Post by: nemt on July 07, 2004, 05:11:00 PM
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 05:19:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 8 2004, 02:11 AM) |
| Find a quote from the bible on the same level as the one from the koran I gave you and then maybe you'll have a point, asshole. |
Nemt, there is a point, and it seems to be going right over your head. Find a quote "on the same level"? Are your religious beliefs governed by who uses the less angry writing? I can not put a quote on the same level, as that would be MY interpretation of it. Your interpretation is much different (one based on your biases as a hysterically xenophobic christian), as would be anyone elses. Until you realize that religious books are not simply quotes you can strictly compare, you'll never understand religion (nor will you understand any novel).
I see you've hit your ceiling maturity, you don't seem to be able to manage discussing without spewing profanity and random insignificant insults (liberals blabla moron blabla). I hope for your own sake you grow out of it.
Edit:
Jesusfreak, I never said guidelines. By life decisions, I meant spiritual as well as mental.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 07, 2004, 05:25:00 PM
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life" - John 3:16
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." - John 3:17
Is that love for you or not????
Plain and simple, there's people behind you that aren't trying to condemn you or to prove you wrong or anything, we are trying to show you the love of Jesus CHrist. It's the entire message of the gospel.
I apologize for any statements my fellow Christians have made that have been perhaps straight on rude or offensive. If I've offended you in any way, it's because telling someone that they are wrong is offensive, and presenting Jesus CHrist is always offensive, but I apologize for anything that was not out of love.
Post by: HeLiuM on July 07, 2004, 05:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (jesusphreak @ Jul 8 2004, 02:25 AM) |
| What do you think of this??? "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life" - John 3:16 "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." - John 3:17 Is that love for you or not???? Plain and simple, there's people behind you that aren't trying to condemn you or to prove you wrong or anything, we are trying to show you the love of Jesus CHrist. It's the entire message of the gospel. I apologize for any statements my fellow Christians have made that have been perhaps straight on rude or offensive. If I've offended you in any way, it's because telling someone that they are wrong is offensive, and presenting Jesus CHrist is always offensive, but I apologize for anything that was not out of love. |
Jesusphreak, you have not offended me (you've shown maturity if nothing else), but you have to understand how others will see everything you say. I don't doubt that you believe your doing the right thing, and are trying to help, but people whos faith is placed in other religions will not see your quotes the same way you do. Only a Christian will consider an excerpt from the Bible admissable, because the Bible is a holy book to them. You can convince people that the Bible teaches that Jesus will love you, but you simply can't convince someone with conviction placed in another religion that it is true simply because it is in the Bible. Imagine someone quoting the Yellow Emperor to you, is it going to convince you Taoism is the right religion? Probably not, and you might even get offended if they persist to try and preach to you against your beliefs.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 07, 2004, 05:52:00 PM
Hopefully I've done all that I can to give you some insight and maybe a new view of CHristianity and hopefully I've shown you how great the love of Jesus Christ is.
May God bless you and keep you, may his face shine upon you, and may you know his ways.
In the love of Jesus CHrist,
signing off....but not done yet...
jesusphreak
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 07, 2004, 10:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (jesusphreak @ Jul 8 2004, 01:56 AM) |
| Did he sacrifice anything? He got murdered (but not willfully). Infact, wasn't he killed in a shoot out???? Oh, yeah, he was..... |
Here we go again....
Joseph Smith was held in jail unlawfully, and was killed by a mob. He did not even have a gun. So yes, i would call that sacrificing his life. And so what if he died fighting, he is not Christ and never claimed to be. Many of the Apostles gave up a good fight before they died.
Try taking your own advice sometime.
Anyway, you seam to be a good person who helps other (truthfully i don't fully understand why you would come to an xbox forum and let everyone know about your good deeds, but to each his own) and that is one of the most important things. Take care, and good luck.
Post by: Colonel32 on July 07, 2004, 10:16:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Hopefully I've done all that I can to give you some insight and maybe a new view of CHristianity May God bless you and keep you, may his face shine upon you, and may you know his ways. |
Same to you
Nemt:can you conceed that part of the hateful literature in the Qu'ran comes from the era in which it was authored?
because, while I see your point, I try to put into perspective that it has not been revised to the extent some religions have and like the other religions, was being used as a way to promote revolution.
You seem to imply that you think the crusades was some sort of just war.
Post by: melon on July 08, 2004, 07:13:00 AM
One last thing ....
What do you think about Islam and Christianity praising the same god? Why is it that your religion is better than islam based purely on the teachings of one son of a prophet over the other? Since you know the bible so well and nemt knows the koran I should not have to elaborate. I have brought this up before but no one who claims to be religous has attempted to answer me.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 08, 2004, 11:17:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| but i dont belive what you say is correct |
because you don't want to. Have you any answer concerning the prophecies I gave you about the Messiah???
Again, I ask again....
Why do the Jews of the Old Testament, the people of a nation that has been rejected and in exile, continually speak of a Messiah that is beaten and "pierced" for the sins of the people???? Why is the Jewish god who was thought of as eternal and invisible in opposition to the idol worship around them continually spoken of as being pierced???? Unless of course, Jesus Christ was God as he said he was and he was indeed pierced by the nails of the cross....
Give an answer for this....
Post by: nemt on July 08, 2004, 11:36:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 8 2004, 12:13 PM) |
| What do you think about Islam and Christianity praising the same god? Why is it that your religion is better than islam based purely on the teachings of one son of a prophet over the other? Since you know the bible so well and nemt knows the koran I should not have to elaborate. I have brought this up before but no one who claims to be religous has attempted to answer me. |
Australians speak the same language as (legal) Americans, but that doesn't mean they don't sound like morons.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 08, 2004, 03:01:00 PM
Post by: Maximumbeing on July 08, 2004, 03:26:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 08, 2004, 10:43:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Australians speak the same language as (legal) Americans, but that doesn't mean they don't sound like morons. |
What on earth did that have to do with what I said?
You just re-affirmed what I wrote.
You ignored the question
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 09, 2004, 10:47:00 AM
Here is what Jesus has to say about beleif....judge for yourself
John 20:29 - Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
of course, no one can proove he ever said this. Dated documentation is the best proof out there, however. Same as a dated newspaper headline saying the Titanic sunk is proof it happened.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 09, 2004, 12:12:00 PM
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 10, 2004, 08:04:00 AM
You want proof he existed? Fine, but there never will be.
In this day and age, isn't it hard to put full beleif in anything? Political scandals, coverups, lies etc.
If you find it too hard to beleive in the concept of him (as many do), at least look at the words he spoke. No one said those things, and lived them at the same time. Yet here we have books which are hostorically acurrate telling us he did, and was the 'messiah' they talked about for so long. And how is it that so many people even 2000 years later could still beleive in him? No of them saw the holes in his hands.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 15, 2004, 01:01:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Could you explain this for me.....why does the Book of Mormon not have a single bit of archaelogical evidence in America when archaelogists (Mormons and nonMormons) have been searching for over a century???? |
First of all, how would you know? Have you visited south and Central America and sought out such architectural evidence? You'll first have to read the book of Mormon instead of getting all your info from off your favorite anti-Mormon site, in order to search for such evidence.
The book of Mormon does have archaelogical evidence in the New World, and in the Old World. There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America. Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America. Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him; to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years. There is also confirmation of the existence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman, locations found in the book of mormon. The River of Laman, said by to be "continuously flowing" into the Red Sea, was long said to be ridiculous by anti-Mormon critics, who alleged that there were no continuously flowing rivers feeding the Red Sea. But there is definitely a substantial and continuously flowing stream in an impressive valley by the Red Sea in the place required by the Book of Mormon text. These are but a few examples. Also, much more has been studied and known about the holy lands then Central and South America, so generally more has been found. Most of the peoples and cultures on the American continents did not leave written records. The only place they did is the area where the Book of Mormon says there were ancient record-keeping people who prized literacy - near the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Wait several hundred years until we know a lot more about the area, and then request the piles of evidence that you want.
| QUOTE |
| Why is the piece of papyri that Joseph Smith claimed to be reformed Egyptian that he translated parts of the Book of Mormon turn out to be Egyptian death rites now that we know how to translate heiroglyphics???? |
The LDS church owns the only piece of the papyri left that Joseph Smith used to translate, and they have let many archeologists look it over. While you are right some of the papyri does mention Egyptian death rites (which is referred to as the book of breathing), so what? Josephs translations of the papyri, collectively called the peril of great price, also refer to such death rites.
| QUOTE |
| From the official Mormon "History of the Church".... """""God is in the still small voice. In all these affidavits, indictments, it is all of the devil--all corruption. Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on the top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet. """""""" |
From the "official Mormon history of the church" is a pretty vague reference. You'll have to give me more proof then this.
| QUOTE |
| And, from another source also revered as sacred in Mormonism: (1)A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high. (2)Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem. (3)Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased. (4)Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. (5)For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord...(D&C: Section 84:1-5) Funny thing is, this "prphecy" was made by Jospeh Smith in 1833. Certainly, none of the people of that generation are living today....??? Yet, Joseph Smith prophesied that not only a temple would be built there, but all of New Jerusalem. But wait a second??? Guess what? The Mormons don't even own that land today. A splinter cell of the Mormon church, whom the Latter-Day Saints completely reject owns it... One of many false prophecies of Joseph Smith. I will not stand by to hear anyone glorify that liar...... |
Yes you are right, that is exactly what is said in the Mormon doctrine and covenants. But you are dead wrong. The real question is what is meant by "this generation"? Read Matt 24. Jesus fortells the doom of Jerusalem, and great calamities that will precede his second coming.
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come (24:14). Immediately after the tribulations of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heavens, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (24:29-31). Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled (24:34)."
So according to your interpretation, Christianity was preached to all the world and all nations, signs of the second coming of Christ, and the second coming of Christ has already happened, and specifically during period of the early Church, during the time period of Christs Apostles. Are you going to accuse Jesus Christ of false prophecies too?
| QUOTE |
| Foe Hammer, are you a Mormon or and ex-LDS member, cause the only people who have studied Mormonism and try to validate it usually are Mormons??? |
Even if I was, why would that matter? Would you condemn me and all the others who do not agreeing with you? Before you go condemning people, you should really learn what their faith is, because obviously you have no idea what youre talking about. You should have almost exhausted your favorite anti-mormon web site by now, but if you would like to get shut down again, feel free to throw some more fallacies my way.
Post by: jesusphreak on July 15, 2004, 03:41:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| The book of Mormon does have archaelogical evidence in the New World, and in the Old World. There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America. Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America. Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him; to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years. There is also confirmation of the existence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman, locations found in the book of mormon. The River of Laman, said by to be "continuously flowing" into the Red Sea, was long said to be ridiculous by anti-Mormon critics, who alleged that there were no continuously flowing rivers feeding the Red Sea. But there is definitely a substantial and continuously flowing stream in an impressive valley by the Red Sea in the place required by the Book of Mormon text. These are but a few examples. Also, much more has been studied and known about the holy lands then Central and South America, so generally more has been found. Most of the peoples and cultures on the American continents did not leave written records. The only place they did is the area where the Book of Mormon says there were ancient record-keeping people who prized literacy - near the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Wait several hundred years until we know a lot more about the area, and then request the piles of evidence that you want. |
This is incredibly vague. The fact is, if you asked any modern archaelogist today that is nonMormon and they would tell you that the Book of Mormon has no archaelogical basis. Heck, some of the top LDS scholars admit that it doesn't work:
Some Mormon scholars are beginning to publicly admit that archaeology does not furnish any significant evidence for the Book of Mormon. Dee F. Green, who at one time served as editor of the University Archaeological Society Newsletter, published at the churchs Brigham Young University, made it plain that archaeological evidence did not prove the Book of Mormon: "The first myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists . If one is to study Book of Mormon archaeology, then one must have a corpus of data with which to deal. We do not. The Book of Mormon is really there so one can have Book of Mormon studies, and archaeology is really there so one can study archaeology, but the two are not wed. At least they are not wed in reality since no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem then that a concentration on geography should be the first order of business, but we have already seen that twenty years of such an approach has left us empty-handed." (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Summer 1969, pp. 77-78)
Thomas Stuart Ferguson was one of the most noted defenders of Book of Mormon archaeology. Mr. Ferguson planned the New World Archaeological Foundation which he hoped would prove The Book of Mormon through archaeological research. The Mormon Church granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to this organization, but in the end, Thomas Stuart Ferguson admitted that although the Foundation made some important contributions to New World archaeology, all his work with regard to the Book of Mormon was in vain. He admitted, in fact, that he had wasted twenty-five years of his life trying to prove the Book of Mormon. In 1975 Ferguson prepared a 29-page paper in which he wrote: "I'm afraid that up to this point, I must agree with Dee Green, who has told us that to date there is no Book-of-Mormon geography." In a letter to Mr. & Mrs. H.W. Lawrence, dated Feb. 20, 1976, Thomas Stuart Ferguson plainly stated: " you cant set Book of Mormon geography down anywhere - because it is fictional and will never meet the requirements of the dirt-archeology."
The Smithsonian absolutely rebukes it:
Because of many false statements disseminated by members of the Mormon Church, such as the one cited above, the Smithsonian Institution has been forced to publish a statement concerning these matters. The four-page statement begins with a denial of the claims put forth by Mormon enthusiasts: "1.The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archeologists see no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book." ("Statement Regarding The Book of Mormon," Smithsonian Institution, Spring 1986)
On the other hand, Christian and nonChristian archaelogists all over the world agree that the Bible is an accurate historical record, and many modern day digs are based on its recordings.
It's shown itself to be true, and the Book of Mormon has not.
Therefore, should we follow the statutes of a book that doesn't even contain an accurate record? Was Joseph Smith really inspired, or was he simply a liar who had something to gain?
Quit defending him and honestly ask yourself, is what the Mormon church teaches true????? Have I really seen something absolutely divine that does the impossible work in my life?
Have I seen people raised from the dead? Have I seen the sick healed? Have I seen ex-drug addicts completely become a new person.
If the Mormon church isn't a financial institution, in what way is it serving poor inner city neigborhoods? Where are the wards, the temples, the missionaries? Why are they all in middle-white class neighborhoods?
Are they really showing the love of Jesus Christ????
It's all I have to say. Ask yourself, ask God for goodness sake if this religion is real. Don't ask for a feeling. The Bible says, "The heart deceitful. Who can understand it?". Ask for truth. Ask for something real, ask for the real God, whoever he is, to show himself to you. He won't turn back and honest seeker.
If you really want to love a real God, ask him, ask him....
Wow, I just thought of this part of one of Martin Luther King Jr's speeches (infact, the "I Have a Dream" speech.
"We can say in the words of the old negro spiritual "We are free at least, free at last, thank God almighty, we are free at last".....
That's a pretty awesome statement. It means a lot to me. Anyway, peace and love be to you,
jesusphreak...
Post by: The unProfessional on July 15, 2004, 04:36:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 16, 2004, 03:14:00 AM
Why do you think they wont get into heaven when they too worship jesus and praise the same god, abliet with a different name?
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 05:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 16 2004, 08:14 AM) |
| Why do you think they wont get into heaven when they too worship jesus and praise the same god, abliet with a different name? |
What better way to worship Jesus than killing thousands of his followers?
Post by: melon on July 16, 2004, 12:12:00 PM
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 03:50:00 PM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 16 2004, 05:12 PM) |
| I know, what were Bush and Blair thinking! |
Your failure to distinguish between accidental civilian casualties, and islamic oppression, terrorism, and mass murder of christians and jews since islam began is troubling. You truly are nothing but a brainwashed tool of the liberal, anti-christian left.
Post by: melon on July 17, 2004, 02:48:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| accidental civilian casualties |
15,000 people dead is not accidental.but its okay i am obviously the one who is brainwashed.
I am the one who belives in God and whatever my president/primeminister says.
Im off to join the army and go and kill people in the name of the Lord, Halleluea!!!
Nemt dont bother replying, if you do I will ignore it. I was asking Jesusfreak the question, not you.
Post by: nemt on July 17, 2004, 08:19:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| You get me wrong. I think people who are involved in any religion are weak. We are alone, there is no higher purpose, our lives dont mean shit, and when we die that is it, no magical far away place for our souls. Historically God was a way for the masses to be controlled and to make people belive that no matter how shite their life is, it doesnt matter bacause you will be rewarded with eternal happiness. You have to be feeble or stupid to buy into that! |
How compassionate, progressive, and classy of you! Insult close to six billion people, calling them feeble and stupid.
Anyway, yes, religion has been the cause of war, but every religious war is due to Islam, or pagan beliefs, Christianity has never been the catalyst for religious strife.
So what if you feel there's no God? Does it bother you so much to see people getting joy and meaning from something you think isn't there? I guess you plan to throw out your kids' teeth, and teach them to scoff at neighbors with christmas trees. This is, of course, assuming you could get laid, which by now we both know, you can't, probably not even if you spend a lot of cash.
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| What about the crusades? I know they were before your country existed, but were they not about the killing or conversion of any pagan/muslims?? |
The crusades were justified. Muslim invaders had occupied the judeo-christian holy land, and were forcing conversion (or death) upon the locals. The crusades were never about conversion, you're thinking of the spread of Islam, when non muslims were forced to choose between conversion, death, and faith taxes. Learn some history before you try to condemn the world's largest religion, jackass.
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| 15,000 people dead is not accidental. |
I guess you're right, US forces sought out civilians and murdered them, you know, to win over the people. You're a moron to contest the accidental nature of civilian casualties, in nearly all wars, on all sides.
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| but its okay i am obviously the one who is brainwashed. I am the one who belives in God and whatever my president/primeminister says. Im off to join the army and go and kill people in the name of the Lord, Halleluea!!! |
You are brainwashed, by your media, but don't feel bad - so are most of your favorite celebrities in hollywood. Personally, I don't believe in God or the afterlife, but I don't attack those who do, calling them feeble and weak. Additionally, the US military is completely secular, and no war the US has been involved in has ever been "in the name of the Lord." ...but feel free to keep telling yourself that if it helps you justify disliking the greatest country in the world.
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| Nemt dont bother replying, if you do I will ignore it. I was asking Jesusfreak the question, not you. |
I wouldn't expect a legitimate reply from you anyway, just lies, half truths, and baseless bush/christian bashing. You're a complete idiot, and you have no place discussing anything on a political forum.
Post by: nemt on July 17, 2004, 10:57:00 AM
| QUOTE (CaTcHa @ Jul 17 2004, 03:26 PM) |
| What is a neighbords (sic) ? as we dont have those in the UK . What is Chritianity (sic) is it something to do with Chriton from Red Dwarf ? It will help me understand  Please oh please Oh great one practice what you preach as far as spellchecking goes or was it just that you were unable to correct it brefore (sic) I quoted it?? ROFL so fast and so "people in glass houses etc" hard , |
You misunderstand the difference between a typo, and not knowing how to spell a word. Misuse of "their/there/they're" isn't a typo, it's a lack of knowledge. "Chritianity" is a failed keystroke, though, a rare typographical mistake, which is acceptable in a lenghty piece of unchecked text. If you can't figure that out, maybe you should watch tv instead.
Post by: melon on July 17, 2004, 11:07:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Chritianity has never been the catalyst for religious strife |
The Ottomon empire on thier4 crusades didnt just kill everybody, they converted people by offering financial incentives. We just plain killed everyone. Or what about Africa? It was become Christians or starve! Thats just the same as killing them.
| QUOTE |
| This is, of course, assuming you could get laid, which by now we both know, you can't, probably not even if you spend a lot of cash. |
| QUOTE |
| I guess you're right, US forces sought out civilians and murdered them, you know, to win over the people. You're a moron to contest the accidental nature of civilian casualties, in nearly all wars, on all sides. |
Damm those Cluster bombs! I wont even mention a certain prizon, or DU shells or carpet bombing. But hey the people of Iraq hate both the US and the UK forces so we did a good job. What was it 2% see us as a liberating force.
| QUOTE |
| the US military is completely secular, and no war the US has been involved in has ever been "in the name of the Lord." |
Didnt Bush stand in a church and make arguments about the war? there are plenty of examples of this I cant be bothered as they have been brought up in other threads.
Im bored of you as are many other people in this forum. Check my spelin i dont car if i got sum rong
Post by: nemt on July 17, 2004, 11:10:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 07:48 AM) |
| Nemt dont bother replying, if you do I will ignore it. I was asking Jesusfreak the question, not you. |
You're a hypocrite, a moron, and a biased, warped tool of the liberal media. You have never been correct, and anything you say can safely be assumed as useless. Suicide is your best option.
Post by: bx2a5z on July 17, 2004, 07:35:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 05:19 PM) |
| How compassionate, progressive, and classy of you! |
Then...
| QUOTE |
| You're a hypocrite, a moron, and a biased, warped tool of the liberal media. You have never been correct, and anything you say can safely be assumed as useless. Suicide is your best option. |
Pot, I'd like to introduce you to kettle.
It's also cute how you buy in to that "liberal media" fantasy. Tell me, what do you see in the media that makes you think there's a liberal slant? I turn on the radio, I hear rabid, ultra-right wing talk show hosts browbeating anyone who isn't a Republican, and constantly pulling out the old "he hates America" chestnut, which has proven to be very effective at fooling idiots. Then I turn on the TV, and I see FoxNews. And, of course, practically every media outlet in the country is owned by conservatives.
The way you talk, you'd think every news anchor in the country was a barefoot hippie.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 18, 2004, 03:11:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| The book of Mormon does have archaelogical evidence in the New World, and in the Old World. There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America. Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America. Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him; to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years. There is also confirmation of the existence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman, locations found in the book of mormon. The River of Laman, said by to be "continuously flowing" into the Red Sea, was long said to be ridiculous by anti-Mormon critics, who alleged that there were no continuously flowing rivers feeding the Red Sea. But there is definitely a substantial and continuously flowing stream in an impressive valley by the Red Sea in the place required by the Book of Mormon text. These are but a few examples. Also, much more has been studied and known about the holy lands then Central and South America, so generally more has been found. Most of the peoples and cultures on the American continents did not leave written records. The only place they did is the area where the Book of Mormon says there were ancient record-keeping people who prized literacy - near the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Wait several hundred years until we know a lot more about the area, and then request the piles of evidence that you want. |
Good hell man, what I have written above is nothing remotely vague; I have named specific locations and references. 90% of the stuff you have written has no factual basis. Now that is what I call vague.
| QUOTE |
| If the Mormon church isn't a financial institution, in what way is it serving poor inner city neigborhoods? Where are the wards, the temples, the missionaries? Why are they all in middle-white class neighborhoods? |
There you go again assuming, and spreading lies again. The LDS church sends hundreds of millions of dollars in the form of food and medication relief to places here in the US and around the world to those who are in need. The LDS has a lay ministry (no one is paid) for their services. How about your church's ministry, are they paid? The LDS missionaries serve for two years and pay their own way; the church doesn't pay for their mission (food, housing, etc.). Who pays for your short month missions? While this should not matter at all, Ive seen many LDS missionaries living in the poor part of the city, in government housing. What matters is they preach to everyone. I see them teaching people in the projects and other extremely less fortunate parts of the city.
Funny thing is, the LDS church is one of the few Christian church's that do not spend so much time, effort, and money bashing and tearing down other churches/religions. They don't because they are very secure/sure in their beliefs. Are you, because it sure doesn't sound like you are? If you were you would not feel the need to bash other religions, or let everyone know of your good works.
So before you go running your mouth off again, think. I have seen and talked with many Mormons who have much more a Christ like attitude then you have shown here. Remember, you will convert more people to Christ by example, and not by telling them how foolish and wrong their beliefs are. But you sound very young, and hopefully as you get older age will distil her wisdom on you.
Post by: sh4d0w_sh4d3 on July 19, 2004, 01:02:00 AM
Post by: gronne on July 27, 2004, 06:07:00 PM
People being naive can't help they have a need to believe in more than theirselves, and I don't blame them for this. I see a great purpose of believing in a God if you live in Africa, it can probably save them (the brain is incredible). I see less, if no reason to believe in a God if you're living in the rich western world, but obviously people do.
Many religious people probably feel more secure in theirselves than us atheists, which is a good thing. But I rather be insecure than dedicating my whole life to a fake.
I suppose the reason we believe in Gods is of fear. Fear of being alone in the universe. Fear of the death. Fear of ourselves. With a God on your side you won't have to fear much, not much that really matters at least. With a God on our side we have most answers we need "What happens when we die?", Heaven of course. That's a pleasant view in my eyes. It's only too bad there exists no Gods so we won't have to fear.
If you dare to believe in yourself instead, you've come a long way. And then you CAN learn to master your fear.
Evolution is a theory, but EVERYTHING points that it's correct, and eventhough a lot of the puzzle is missing, I choose to believe in it. As the years go by we know more and more about the evolution.
I, myself hate the evolution. The evolution is very cruel, it's taught us that murder is the only way to survive, and that your own people are the mightiest and most important. But since the evolution has brought the people to the state of today we've become civilized, and use different systems where the tribes are now in the millions instead of 10 to 20 people, and now we believe that people don't live in tribes anymore, but, we are still only tribes, yet bigger. For example the tribe called USA hate the tribe called Mid-east and vice-versa, or the tribe called christianity hate Islam and vice versa. And no matter how civilized we think we are we'll probably always have tribes. If the world ever gets united as one it's most likely that it is an other planet attacking us, but then we are a tribe against them.
And eventhough I think the evolution is so cruel, I choose to believe in it.
To me it's only logical to believe in something that's provable, than to something that is not. The world is not nice, so I think we should deal with it. And religons will only destroy it.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 27, 2004, 09:21:00 PM
your history:
1) 4.6 billion years ago, a blip in space starts spinning, and explodes
2) explosion creates the solar systems and galaxy
...I could go, there is much more
these first 2 steps makes even more questions than answers.
Let's look at some the questions:
what was the blip? why did it spin? where was the physical law to create motion? why did the law exist? Who made this law? what created the motion? Why was ANYTHING there in the first place? Why did it explode? Why is the universe not equally distrubuted then? Why was space there? How could all the mass of the universe fit into this blip? How do we know how big it was? How do we know it was 4.6 bya?
Post by: HeLiuM on July 27, 2004, 11:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (Mr. Chips @ Jul 28 2004, 05:24 AM) |
| I personally, would not ridicule you, for your beleifs...but evolution does not make sense unless your judgement is really clouded. your history: 1) 4.6 billion years ago, a blip in space starts spinning, and explodes 2) explosion creates the solar systems and galaxy ...I could go, there is much more these first 2 steps makes even more questions than answers. Let's look at some the questions: what was the blip? why did it spin? where was the physical law to create motion? why did the law exist? Who made this law? what created the motion? Why was ANYTHING there in the first place? Why did it explode? Why is the universe not equally distrubuted then? Why was space there? How could all the mass of the universe fit into this blip? How do we know how big it was? How do we know it was 4.6 bya? |
A couple of your questions could be answered (black holes fit a helluva lot of mass in a tiny area. We don't know how big it was. Nobody made the law, its simply how the universe works. To ask that is like asking "who made yellow".) The rest of your questions, well they're the reason science exists. We like to figure out things.
Evolutionary theory (and science in general) is for those who like to find answers about their surroundings, instead of immediately accounting it to a deity, one we have no way of testing for any shred of existence, and moving on. I can't imagine what life would be like if everyone had chosen religion over science (say goodbye to modern living).
And nemt, that was truly a worthless flame. Stop wasting time/electricity/oxygen.
Cute fish.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 28, 2004, 02:23:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I've yet to see a single LDS ward in all of South Dallas.... But there won't be one....too many blacks and too much poverty for the church to gain anything out of it... |
Why the hell does the location of their meeting place have anything to do with their relationship with the poorer class? It's just common sense not to construct a church in a run down drug infested parts of town. The place would be looted in a week. Really, you are going no where with this argument.
| QUOTE |
| And don't tell me that I'm being racist and spreading lies. The Mormon Church of today in America is vastly middle class white..... |
And your point?
| QUOTE |
| Blacks were not allowed in the church until the 1960s cause they were "damned" and they weren't allowed as leaders until 1982... |
Wrong. Blacks have always been allowed in the LDS church (baptism). The mormon church never did segregate its church, unlike the protestant christen churches that you belong to did.
| QUOTE |
| Excuse me??? THey aren't bashing other churches???? Isn't that what their missionaries go around and do??? If a Mormon missionary walks up to a house and the person living there tells them that they are a Christian, will the missionary not try to convert the Christian into the LDS faith??? They are gonna just let them keep going to a Baptist, Methodist, or Catholic church??? |
Bashing is to engage in harsh, accusatory, threatening criticism. The LDS missionaries do not do this, all they do is share with people their beliefs about Christ and invite them to learn more. Bashing is what people do who are insecure, who feel the need to tear down others to make them feel/look better.
You really have a hatred for anything that might threaten your beliefs. Try taking off your blinders for all but two seconds, you might learn something.
Post by: gronne on July 28, 2004, 05:08:00 AM
| QUOTE (Mr. Chips @ Jul 28 2004, 05:24 AM) |
| I personally, would not ridicule you, for your beleifs...but evolution does not make sense unless your judgement is really clouded. your history: 1) 4.6 billion years ago, a blip in space starts spinning, and explodes 2) explosion creates the solar systems and galaxy ...I could go, there is much more these first 2 steps makes even more questions than answers. Let's look at some the questions: what was the blip? why did it spin? where was the physical law to create motion? why did the law exist? Who made this law? what created the motion? Why was ANYTHING there in the first place? Why did it explode? Why is the universe not equally distrubuted then? Why was space there? How could all the mass of the universe fit into this blip? How do we know how big it was? How do we know it was 4.6 bya? |
To be honest, I have no idea whether to believe in the big bang or not, it's by no means crucial in the theory of evolution. There are heavy documentations of how it happened, so I can't explain(and don't know) all here. As we speak a lot of scientists believing in the theory of evolution are trying to develop different theories of how it all started instead of the big bang theory. I don't even think Charles Darwin wrote about the big bang theory, I truly doubt it. The theory of evolution is provable without knowing anything about big bang. And your knowledge is truly lacking since it was Tellus that came to be 4.6 billion years ago. Big bang occured about 14 billion years ago.
I eventually believe they will come up with a bulletproof theory. If it's big bang or not, who knows. What I do know is that it'll include the theory of evolution.
Will religious people accept it? Most likely not. But more and more will.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 28, 2004, 10:46:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I eventually believe they will come up with a bulletproof theory. |
they may come up with a good theory at some point...but anything that wasn't witnessed is up to speculation.
As for 14 billion years, I have not heard that one, I have seen charts and things saying it was about 4.6... I even had to draw a timetable in Biology back in high school. It has been changing quite a bit. Originally, the spinning "blip" was said to be trillions of kilometers wide, now the average 7th grade textbook says "it was as big as a period on this page." so these things change, part of my reason for not putting any faith in their ideas... after all, Almighty Stephen Hawking himself beleives firmly in the Big Bang (or at least seems to be the specialist on the subject)...or maybe he just likes to write about things to sell books? You won't find him in this debate, that's for sure!
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 29, 2004, 04:45:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Because if they won't go to the poor, it shows how they think of the poor. They are never gonna change a city if all they do is treat them like leppers and run special little food runs into the city every once in awhile. It's not common sense. The church I'm staying at right now is in the worst part of South Dallas. There have been three shootings in the past 2 weeks. Drugs and prostitution do infest this part of town. Infact, the very apartments we are staying in used to be the #1 location for selling crack cocaine in all of Dallas. There are steps across the street that lead to nowhere (lots that used to be whorehouses and drughouses)....but since the church has come here, everything has changed. The place would be looted in a week? Isn't that pretty hardcore discrimination. I don't think the Mormon church knows the poor, it doesn't know the city, it just wants to get its money. I'm not going anywhere with this arguement because the Mormon church refuses to put the poor in equality with the rich - so much so that its afraid to build churches here to reach out to the people because its scared that they'll be looted? |
Did you fail to read my second to last post? The LDS missionaries DO actively seek out and teach the less fortunate poorer class, and all else who will listen. I've seen them do this, but if you want to assume things, as you do so well, go on telling your lies. Just because there is not an LDS church in these part doesn't mean a damn thing.
| QUOTE |
| Absolutely wrong. "Salt Lake City -- Mormon church leaders describe what happened 25 years ago as a shared, simultaneous revelation from God. While gathered inside the faith's Salt Lake City Temple, the officials said God revealed that they should allow black men to become members of the Mormon priesthood, reversing more than a century of church practice. The church ended the ban with a four-paragraph statement released on June 8, 1978, that said ''every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood.'' " |
You said "Blacks were not allowed in the church until the 1960s cause they were damned". You are the one who is absolutely wrong. Like I said, the LDS church has never discriminated anyone (black, Jew, etc.) from becoming a member of the LDS church through baptism. The revelation you speak of was allowing blacks to hold the priesthood in 1978. And while you can scream discrimination all you want, God has throughout time chosen certain tribes to hold the priesthood. Levites for example. So while youre at it accuse God of being discrimination as well.
| QUOTE |
| And to you, what I'm doing is YOUR definition of bashing. I think I'm telling the truth. |
I quoted the dictionaries definition of "bashing", what is yours?
| QUOTE |
| Excuse me? I have hatred (if I have any) for lies. |
Then you should really stop telling them then.
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 30, 2004, 12:08:00 AM
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 30, 2004, 02:39:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I'm not assuming things. The fact is, there is not a single Mormon ward in all of South Dallas, and I have to wonder why. |
So you wondering why, and guessing a reason is not assuming? Wow! Talk about irony. Good one.13)
| QUOTE |
| That's quite different than the Book of Mormon claiming that God damned the Lamanites and therefore darkened their skin.... |
So you ditched your African American rant, and now are focusing on dark skin in general now. You know that there are groups of people who have just as dark of skin, and even darker then African American. So you'll have to include them all in your rant now if youre going to attach dark skin.
In the Book of Mormon the Lamanites were indeed cursed with a darkening of the skin, but the darkening of the skin in itself was not the curse, it was to distinguish the unfaithful Lamanites, at the time, from the light skinned Nephites. Later on in the Book of Mormon there were many dark shinned Lamanites who were more righteous and blessed from the Lord then the light skinned Nephites.
14)
| QUOTE |
| The Mormon church was blatantly racist from its foundation. Now, you might say that Christian churches have been segregated or perhaps racist. This is true, but in no way does the Bible, nor Christ, make any comments that sets one race as inferior to another, and the Bible is very clear that Jew and Gentile all are treated equally like God. |
You need to study your bible more. The Lord throughout time has chosen/blessed/favored different tribes of people due to their righteousness, while others have not been. For example: the Jews were the Lords chosen people, the Levites where the only tribe who were chosen to hold the Melchezidech Priesthood, and the gentiles where not actively proselyted tell some time after Christs ascension into heaven; Paul was the Apostle chosen to take the gospel to the gentiles. This is but a few examples of the Lord giving special blessing to one group of people over another. This is the same thing found in the Book of Mormon. It is called being blessed for roughhouses. It is not setting people inferior to another. If you have a problem with this, then you better take it up with the Lord, and tell him he is wrong.
| QUOTE |
| And actually, you were correct. Upon further study, I seen no evidence that blacks were not admitted into the church prior to the 1960s. |
And yet you posted this false info anyways. Why? At least you admitted on one of the many occasions that the info you posted was false. Now how about the others...
| QUOTE |
| Now, you are claiming that everything I have to say, despite the fact that a lot of it is from outside, nonChristian sources is all lies. |
Not everything, just 95% of what you have accused the Mormon church of.
Lets go through the many occurrences where you have over assumed, and been false on, just to refresh your memory:
1)
| QUOTE |
| but they also believe that Jesus is Satan's brother |
True, but in the sense that all of Gods children are brothers and sisters, and Lucifer was also one of Gods spirits but fell (Morning star).
2)
| QUOTE |
| They believe in salvation by works (ie. you can work your way into heaven). |
Not true. They believe in salvation by grace (Christ Atonement), after all one can do. This does make more logic to me then death bed repentance. "Faith without works is dead". They do believe that works is very important, but no matter how many good works a person does while they are alive, if it were not for christ atonement they could not be saved, because christ paid for the sins of all humankind. But if someone does evil all their days, and does not repent (repentance requires more then just confessing your sins, it requires a godly sorrow and a change of heart and actions), then christ's atonement will have no effect on that individual. Read the book of James again, and then maybe you'll understand what i'm talking about.
3)
| QUOTE |
| Joseph Smith also has a court order from New York state on the charge of looking into a stone to tell the future. This court order is from several years before the Book of Mormon was ever published. |
It was called the uramin in thumum (sp?). He used it to aide him in translating the book of mormon from off of gold plates. The book of mormon wasn't published tell 1830, joseph smith started translating the plates 1821. So he was using the sear stone well before the book was published; not to tell the future.
4)
| QUOTE |
| The Book of Mormon itself has absolutely no credence in modern archaelogy. It has gone over many many changes in its text in the 170 years its been in publication. |
The only changes i noticed were grammatical. No points of their doctrine were changed. I have studied the LDS faith for some time now (quite interesting), and have compared 1890 and present editions of the book. If you want to talk about changes, the bible has been through many translations, and messed with during the early days of catholicism.
5)
| QUOTE |
| Mormonism itself is a direct copy of Islam. God calls his "prophet" to reform something messed up. He sees an angel (both instances Gabriel), receives a revelation and receives new "scripture". |
The angle was called Moroni, not Gabriel that visited Joseph Smith. God has always used prophets and apostles to run his kingdom when the church was on the earth. Question is why are there not any prophets and apostles today?
6)
| QUOTE |
| Did he [Joseph Smith] sacrifice anything? He got murdered (but not willfully). Infact, wasn't he killed in a shoot out???? Oh, yeah, he was..... |
Joseph Smith was held in jail unlawfully, and was killed by a mob. He did not even have a gun. So yes, i would call that sacrificing his life. And so what if he died fighting, he is not Christ and never claimed to be. Many of the Apostles gave up a good fight before they died.
7)
| QUOTE |
| Could you explain this for me.....why does the Book of Mormon not have a single bit of archaelogical evidence in America when archaelogists (Mormons and nonMormons) have been searching for over a century???? |
The book of Mormon does have archaelogical evidence in the New World, and in the Old World. There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America. Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America. Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him; to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years. There is also confirmation of the existence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman, locations found in the book of mormon. The River of Laman, said by to be "continuously flowing" into the Red Sea, was long said to be ridiculous by anti-Mormon critics, who alleged that there were no continuously flowing rivers feeding the Red Sea. But there is definitely a substantial and continuously flowing stream in an impressive valley by the Red Sea in the place required by the Book of Mormon text. These are but a few examples. Also, much more has been studied and known about the holy lands then Central and South America, so generally more has been found. Most of the peoples and cultures on the American continents did not leave written records. The only place they did is the area where the Book of Mormon says there were ancient record-keeping people who prized literacy - near the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Wait several hundred years until we know a lot more about the area, and then request the piles of evidence that you want.
8)
| QUOTE |
| Why is the piece of papyri that Joseph Smith claimed to be reformed Egyptian that he translated parts of the Book of Mormon turn out to be Egyptian death rites now that we know how to translate heiroglyphics???? |
The LDS church owns the only piece of the papyri left that Joseph Smith used to translate, and they have let many archeologists look it over. While you are right some of the papyri does mention Egyptian death rites (which is referred to as the book of breathing), so what? Josephs translations of the papyri, collectively called the peril of great price, also refer to such death rites.
9)
| QUOTE |
| And, from another source also revered as sacred in Mormonism: (1)A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high. (2)Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem. (3)Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased. (4)Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. (5)For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord...(D&C: Section 84:1-5) Funny thing is, this "prphecy" was made by Jospeh Smith in 1833. Certainly, none of the people of that generation are living today....??? Yet, Joseph Smith prophesied that not only a temple would be built there, but all of New Jerusalem. But wait a second??? Guess what? The Mormons don't even own that land today. A splinter cell of the Mormon church, whom the Latter-Day Saints completely reject owns it... One of many false prophecies of Joseph Smith. I will not stand by to hear anyone glorify that liar...... |
I truely loved this acusation of yours.
Yes you are right, that is exactly what is said in the Mormon doctrine and covenants. But you are dead wrong. The real question is what is meant by "this generation"? Read Matt 24. Jesus fortells the doom of Jerusalem, and great calamities that will precede his second coming.
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come (24:14). Immediately after the tribulations of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heavens, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (24:29-31). Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled (24:34)."
So according to your interpretation, Christianity was preached to all the world and all nations, signs of the second coming of Christ, and the second coming of Christ has already happened, and specifically during period of the early Church, during the time period of Christs Apostles. Are you going to call Jesus Christ a lier, and accuse him of false prophecies too?
10)
| QUOTE |
| If the Mormon church isn't a financial institution, in what way is it serving poor inner city neigborhoods? Where are the wards, the temples, the missionaries? Why are they all in middle-white class neighborhoods? |
You definently recieved your moneys worth out of this one.
There you go again assuming, and spreading lies again. The LDS church sends hundreds of millions of dollars in the form of food and medication relief to places here in the US and around the world to those who are in need. The LDS has a lay ministry (no one is paid) for their services. How about your church's ministry, are they paid? The LDS missionaries serve for two years and pay their own way; the church doesn't pay for their mission (food, housing, etc.). Who pays for your short month missions? While this should not matter at all, Ive seen many LDS missionaries living in the poor part of the city, in government housing. What matters is they preach to everyone. I see them teaching people in the projects and other extremely less fortunate parts of the city.
11)
| QUOTE |
| Blacks were not allowed in the church until the 1960s cause they were "damned" and they weren't allowed as leaders until 1982... |
Atleast you admitted that you were wrong on this accusation.
Wrong. Blacks have always been allowed in the LDS church (baptism). While you can scream discrimination all you want, God has throughout time chosen certain tribes to hold the priesthood. Levites for example. So while youre at it accuse God of being discrimination as well. The mormon church never did segregate its church, unlike the protestant christen churches that you belong to did.
12)
| QUOTE |
| Excuse me??? THey aren't bashing other churches???? Isn't that what their missionaries go around and do??? If a Mormon missionary walks up to a house and the person living there tells them that they are a Christian, will the missionary not try to convert the Christian into the LDS faith??? They are gonna just let them keep going to a Baptist, Methodist, or Catholic church??? |
Bashing is to engage in harsh, accusatory, threatening criticism. The LDS missionaries do not do this, all they do is share with people their beliefs about Christ and invite them to learn more. Bashing is what people do who are insecure, who feel the need to tear down others to make them feel/look better.
Well there you have it. Now that is a lot of false accusations. Now try answering my questions for a change, instead of conveniently forgetting what you have said, and explain your ignorance in the above situations.
| QUOTE |
| May Christ open your heart to hear his truth. Lord, I ask that you would open the heart and the eyes of this man so that he might see and believe in the real you, and not a false God made up by a follower of the father of lies. In Jesus name, Amen. |
And i would pray the same for you.
I must tell you thanks for the time i have had discussing the LDS religion with you. You have made me realize how much truth the Mormon church has in their teachings. In the past i have been to lazy to act on what i've kown to be true, but now i think i'll finally join the LDS faith.
Post by: melon on July 30, 2004, 02:56:00 AM
If god exists, where is he physically? to exist he must have a physical presense and a mass.
When was he born?
What was before god?
What laws govern what god can do?
How old is the earth?
Did dinosaurs exist?
IF evolution does not exist explain how over time animals adapt to there surroundings and why animals today are more intelligent than 100 million years ago.
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 30, 2004, 03:48:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 30 2004, 10:59 AM) |
| A couple of questions for all you religous types.. If god exists, where is he physically? to exist he must have a physical presense and a mass. When was he born? What was before god? What laws govern what god can do? How old is the earth? Did dinosaurs exist? IF evolution does not exist explain how over time animals adapt to there surroundings and why animals today are more intelligent than 100 million years ago. |
God doesn't do things by magic, He follows the same laws of physics that we understand; He just understands them better.
Probably 5 billion yrs old, as science has proposed.
Yes, dinosaurs existed; it's kind of hard to refute that considering we have their fossils.
Evolutions does exist to some degree. I believe a species can evolve within a species (adapt to environment, etc.), just not to the point of species evolving into another species. No educated person would be fool enough to disclaim evolution entirely. If you understand how evolution works (mutations and the law of probability) it makes sense.
Post by: melon on July 30, 2004, 03:53:00 AM
Did he evolve?
On evolution why cant a species evolve into another?
How do you explain elephants and mammoths?
Post by: Foe-hammer on July 30, 2004, 04:03:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 30 2004, 11:56 AM) |
| Good to see you have a more balance view than others, but if follows rules, the rules must have existed before god. So when was god born and why? Who are gods parents? Did he evolve? On evolution why cant a species evolve into another? How do you explain elephants and mammoths? |
True. I have an idea, but do not know. The LDS religions has the best answers I have heard on some of the questions your asking.
The simplest definition of species is, organisms that can reproduce with eachother. Under this classification, i believe that if it were possible (that is Mammoths being alive today) they could indeed reproduce with an elephant.
Post by: melon on July 30, 2004, 05:07:00 AM
How about horse's and donkeys. They evolved from a singular species. They can mate but the offspring is infertile and doesnt live long.
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 30, 2004, 01:22:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| True. I have an idea, but do not know. The LDS religions has the best answers I have heard on some of the questions your asking. |
before this topic "evolved"
... partly my fault I guess, I get worked up about that it was about Mormons, and my question is to foe-hammer, you seem to know a lot about the LDS church. You said you are not one, so do you have a friend who is?
If not, where did you get all the information? I estimate you spent about 45 minutes typing !
Post by: jesusphreak on July 30, 2004, 03:48:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| So you ditched your African American rant, and now are focusing on dark skin in general now. You know that there are groups of people who have just as dark of skin, and even darker then African American. So you'll have to include them all in your rant now if youre going to attach dark skin. In the Book of Mormon the Lamanites were indeed cursed with a darkening of the skin, but the darkening of the skin in itself was not the curse, it was to distinguish the unfaithful Lamanites, at the time, from the light skinned Nephites. Later on in the Book of Mormon there were many dark shinned Lamanites who were more righteous and blessed from the Lord then the light skinned Nephites. |
Brigham Young, "Cain slew his brother.... and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is a flat nose and black skin."(Journal of Discourses, Vol 7, page 290)
Joseph Smith, "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race." (The Way to Perfection, page 101)
This is cleary making reference to the fact that those of black skin are an inferior race. In the Bible, it is very clear that no race is discriminated against at all. Infact, in the early part of Acts, one of the first Christian converts is a black.
| QUOTE |
You need to study your bible more. The Lord throughout time has chosen/blessed/favored different tribes of people due to their righteousness, while others have not been. For example: the Jews were the Lords chosen people, the Levites where the only tribe who were chosen to hold the Melchezidech Priesthood, and the gentiles where not actively proselyted tell some time after Christs ascension into heaven; Paul was the Apostle chosen to take the gospel to the gentiles. This is but a few examples of the Lord giving special blessing to one group of people over another. This is the same thing found in the Book of Mormon. It is called being blessed for roughhouses. It is not setting people inferior to another. If you have a problem with this, then you better take it up with the Lord, and tell him he is wrong. |
In no way does the Bible say that one race is inferior to another. Yes, the Levites received the blessings of the priesthood, but the Judahites received the blessing of leadership. All of the tribes had a special role to play, which is very similar to the Biblical idea of the church being the body of Christ, and different people being different parts and performing different functions, but in no way being inferior.
Again, I quote Joseph Smith and Brigham Young:
Brigham Young, "Cain slew his brother.... and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is a flat nose and black skin."(Journal of Discourses, Vol 7, page 290)
Joseph Smith, "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race." (The Way to Perfection, page 101)
They are saying that Cain became a black man, and then his offspring was made an inferior race...How racist is that???
| QUOTE |
And yet you posted this false info anyways. Why? At least you admitted on one of the many occasions that the info you posted was false. Now how about the others... |
And you keep touching upon this fact that I admitted that I may have been wrong. Is admittance to a fault wrong?
| QUOTE |
Not everything, just 95% of what you have accused the Mormon church of. Lets go through the many occurrences where you have over assumed, and been false on, just to refresh your memory: |
Let's do that.
| QUOTE |
but they also believe that Jesus is Satan's brother ----------------------------------------------- True, but in the sense that all of Gods children are brothers and sisters, and Lucifer was also one of Gods spirits but fell (Morning star). |
Except, the definition in the Bible that Jesus is God, not just the son of God, which is part of the trinity, and Mormons definitely do not follow that.
John 8:58, Jesus says, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was, I AM."
This was the name that God told Moses to tell the Israelites when Moses was first called. He told Moses that his name was, I AM.
Jesus tells the Jews that his name is I AM. He is calling himself God. It's why the Jews tried to stone him, because he was calling himself God.
Mormons deny that Jesus is God.
The Mormon Jesus -
*The literal son of god and his goddess wife begotten in the pre-existence.
*The brother of all spirits born in heaven in the premortal existence.
*One of 3 gods in the godhead.
*The Trinity is three separate gods.
*First one to receive a spirit body.
*Atoned for sin on the cross and in the garden of Gethsemane.
The Christian Jesus -
*Not the literal son of god and his goddess wife.
*Not the brother of all spirits born in heaven in a premortal existence.
*Not one of 3 gods in the godhead.
*The Trinity is 3 persons in one God.
*Was always spirit from eternity.
*Atoned for sin on the cross alone
| QUOTE |
They believe in salvation by works (ie. you can work your way into heaven). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not true. They believe in salvation by grace (Christ Atonement), after all one can do. This does make more logic to me then death bed repentance. "Faith without works is dead". They do believe that works is very important, but no matter how many good works a person does while they are alive, if it were not for christ atonement they could not be saved, because christ paid for the sins of all humankind. But if someone does evil all their days, and does not repent (repentance requires more then just confessing your sins, it requires a godly sorrow and a change of heart and actions), then christ's atonement will have no effect on that individual. Read the book of James again, and then maybe you'll understand what i'm talking about. |
In order to reach the highest level of heaven in the three-tired structure of the Mormon view of heaven, quote, "good works must be obtained". All those who believe in Jesus have the right to the first level of heaven, and quote, "those who show grace and mercy to those who are the Latter-Day saints" will make it to the second level. However, only by having a temple marriage, having a successful mission, being baptized in the name of the dead, being baptized into the Mormon church, and serving the church in a form of higher office as ordered to be fulfilled by your patriachal blessing (which again, is what the blacks were denied). Unless all of these criterias are met, you do not stand a chance of gaining the highest level of heaven. This is a stark difference between the Biblical view of heaven.
However, many Mormons will argue that the Bible in the Old Testament argues about three levels of heaven. However, the Hebrew words simply mean , "the sky", "the space (more literally the upper sky)", and then the "heavenly realm", which is interesting considering they had no form of science to even know a "space" existed.
So think about this. According to the Biblical view, all "who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved". Think about the criminal on the cross. Did he not repent on his deathbed? He didn't do any works, but in asking for forgiveness, Christ then told him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise".
The fact also that Mormons enter the third heaven by works is proof that in their theology, works are greater than the salvation of Christ.
You'd better get busy, or you are gonna be stuck with me in the first level.....
But think about this also, the priesthood and church office blessings that blacks were denied meant that they were also restricted to only the first and second levels of heaven.
I've read the book of James. James is very clear, "faith without works is dead". However, he isn't saying that faith is based on works. The Bible is very clear about that. It just is saying that if you truly are in the faith of Jesus Christ, it is inevitable that good works will start to show. If this was not the case, the book of James contradicts the entire Bible (which it obviously does not).
| QUOTE |
| Joseph Smith also has a court order from New York state on the charge of looking into a stone to tell the future. This court order is from several years before the Book of Mormon was ever published. -------------------------------------------------------------------- It was called the uramin in thumum (sp?). He used it to aide him in translating the book of mormon from off of gold plates. The book of mormon wasn't published tell 1830, joseph smith started translating the plates 1821. So he was using the sear stone well before the book was published; not to tell the future. |
This reminds my friend automatically of the story of Paul and Barnabbas coming upon a girl possessed by a demon telling fortunes and speaking other languages. There is no differentiation between this young girl being demon possessed and telling the future, and Joseph Smith making a quick buck by using these "seeing stones" to tell the future.
When the Bible does speak of the Uramin and Thuramin, it speaks more of them as a type of die. The Bible always says, "they cast lots" to determine the Lord's will. It does not in anyway speak of them as these seeing stones. Seeing stones in themselves are blatantly a pagan device. The prophets of the Bible saw God and knew God face to face, they didn't need any seeing stone.
| QUOTE |
The Book of Mormon itself has absolutely no credence in modern archaelogy. It has gone over many many changes in its text in the 170 years its been in publication. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The only changes i noticed were grammatical. No points of their doctrine were changed. I have studied the LDS faith for some time now (quite interesting), and have compared 1890 and present editions of the book. If you want to talk about changes, the bible has been through many translations, and messed with during the early days of catholicism. |
In the opening pages of the Book of Mormon, the prophet rights a statement saying "additions and subtractions will be made to this book in light of new revelation". This cleary found in the Book of Mormon, just a page after the story of how Joseph Smith came to write the Book of Mormon admits itself that the book has changed over time due to "revelation". You can see the obvious problem in that. God cannot contradict himself, and does God change????
Would God really, after 140 years of saying that blacks are an inferior and cursed race all of a sudden decide that blacks were worthy of the third heaven (of which they weren't before)? Or is it more likely that pressure upon the church by outside society forced them to change their practices? Is this not unlike polygamy? And this is just the start of the problems with that.
| QUOTE |
Mormonism itself is a direct copy of Islam. God calls his "prophet" to reform something messed up. He sees an angel (both instances Gabriel), receives a revelation and receives new "scripture". ------------------------------------------------------- The angle was called Moroni, not Gabriel that visited Joseph Smith. God has always used prophets and apostles to run his kingdom when the church was on the earth. Question is why are there not any prophets and apostles today? |
I don't deny that there are. The Bible never says that there won't be any more prophets nor apostles. Infact, one of the stated gifts of the church was the gift of prophecy, and I and a few of my friends have personally talked with people who could be said to be prophets. An apostle was one that is said to have seen the Lord. I recall a story of a man named Sunghar Singh. He was actually a Nepali Hindu in the early 1930s and decided one night as a young man that if the real God of the universe didn't reveal himself, he would go down to the train tracks, put his head on them, and wait for the morning train to kill him. While waiting, a light filled the room and he believed that Jesus Christ appealed to him. You could call him an apostle. Christians do not deny modern-day apostles nor prophets.
However, the Bible is very clear in Deuteronomy 18 that if a prophet does not continue on in previous revelations of God, he is not a prophet. They must continue on in the work already set forth. Joseph Smith did not do that, neiter do his so called modern day prophets. They continually recieve this "new revelation" which completely abolishes what has been set before. The main case is the case of Joseph Smith. His revelation of Mormonism is completely unlike what they Bible sets forth (as I have shown earlier).
Now, relating to the issue of Islam.
If I were to describe a religion that was founded by a prophet, whom was given instruction on golden tablets, that are now buried and hidden for safe keeping, whom many people rebelled against and thought was crazy, but was sure that he was given a new divine revelation from God, took his people on a pilgrimage to a promised land, and was even promised that plurality of wives would be a blessing, you would automatically assume that I was talking about Mormonism and the story of Joseph Smith. However, the truth is, this is taken from the first two books of the Hadith, and the first five Surahs of the Koran, and is the story of the quote, "blessed prophet Muhammad".
Is it a coincidence that both of these men were raised as CHristians and suddenly received this new, "correct" revelation of God, or is it just Satan trying an old trick once more, to lie, distort, and decieve God's people?
| QUOTE |
Did he [Joseph Smith] sacrifice anything? He got murdered (but not willfully). Infact, wasn't he killed in a shoot out???? Oh, yeah, he was..... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Joseph Smith was held in jail unlawfully, and was killed by a mob. He did not even have a gun. So yes, i would call that sacrificing his life. And so what if he died fighting, he is not Christ and never claimed to be. Many of the Apostles gave up a good fight before they died. |
There's no proof that any of the apostles gave a good fight. Infact, while Stephen was being stoned, he prayed, "Lord, forgive them for what they do". Doesn't sound like fighting back to me. Paul, when given the decision between leaving and heading to Rome where he knew he would die, willfully went to Rome and died.
Infact, you won't find a single story about one of the apostles fighting back. They willingly gave their lives.
Now, what about this Joseph Smith?
He was arrested, the police reports said that he had a gun in his hand, and he did infact "give a good fight"....
quote, "In 1844 Smith, Mayor of Nauvoo, orders the newspaper The Nauvoo Expositor destroyed since it was printing information considered detrimental to him. In 1844 Smith and his brother Hyrum are shot and killed in a shootout with a mob (during which Joseph Smith mortally wounded two non-Mormons) while they were being held in jail for charges based upon destroying The Nauvoo Expositor."
This seems like a pretty lawful reason to be jailed. And, I wonder how these two nonMormons were wounded if there was no shootout. And infact, doesn't Jesus say to turn the other cheek and pray, instead of killing those who persecute us. Sounds like a wolf in sheeps clothing to me....
| QUOTE |
Could you explain this for me.....why does the Book of Mormon not have a single bit of archaelogical evidence in America when archaelogists (Mormons and nonMormons) have been searching for over a century???? ---------------------------------------------------- The book of Mormon does have archaelogical evidence in the New World, and in the Old World. There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America. Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America. Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him; to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years. There is also confirmation of the existence of the Valley of Lemuel and the River of Laman, locations found in the book of mormon. The River of Laman, said by to be "continuously flowing" into the Red Sea, was long said to be ridiculous by anti-Mormon critics, who alleged that there were no continuously flowing rivers feeding the Red Sea. But there is definitely a substantial and continuously flowing stream in an impressive valley by the Red Sea in the place required by the Book of Mormon text. These are but a few examples. Also, much more has been studied and known about the holy lands then Central and South America, so generally more has been found. Most of the peoples and cultures on the American continents did not leave written records. The only place they did is the area where the Book of Mormon says there were ancient record-keeping people who prized literacy - near the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Wait several hundred years until we know a lot more about the area, and then request the piles of evidence that you want. |
"There are explicit burial rituals mounds described in the book of Mormon found in North America."
These burial mounds were found by the English in Spanish during the 1500s. How again was this a divine revelation when Joseph Smith lived after thier discovery?
"Architectural structures and materials described in the book of Mormon have been found in ancient building in Central America."
Was Coronado a Mormon prophet because he found these, too???? Again, Joseph Smith lived after the Spaniards had colonized central and South America. Testimonies even say that Smith was well read. Would it be suprising if he read a book about Central America or the Spanish conquest? How is this divine revelation again?
"Part of the Book of Mormon does occur in the Old World, and there references to real places like Jerusalem; to caves outside the city wall (Joseph Smith did not even know there were walls around Jerusalem) - and such caves have been discovered in abundance, but were not known to him;"
For goodness sake, the Bible even talks about caves outside Jerusalem. There are caves everywhere in the world, and why is this divine revelation if Joseph Smith puts a cave in his story? Even the earliest accounts of the conquest of America contain statements such as, "this wall was like the old walls around Jerusalem". The Crusaders brought back a lot of material about Jerusalem and the holy lands......Anyone with a library at their disposal could say half the things Smith did. The Crusaders of the early Middle Ages often hid in caves outside Jerusalem, and in the story of Robin Hood, he hides in a cave outside Jerusalem until he can escape...
"to a place of mourning and burial called Nahom, described as being far to the "south-southeast" of Jerusalem which corresponds with an ancient place of a similar name (Nehem) right where the Book of Mormon says it should be; there is a newly discovered place directly east of Nahom on the coast of present-day Oman (a place called Wadi Sayq) that fits the Book of Mormon description of "Bountiful" perfectly - and this was unknown and even ludicrous until recent years."
So because he madeup a name that sounds similar to another name, he is a prophet???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I mean, really, I could go on and on....
I just ask that before you make some quick replies on what I've said, please really read what I've put and study some of this and think about it.
If you'd really look at some of this stuff, and stop listening to what Mormon apologists tell you, you might find a truth different than what they have to say.
Good luck, man, and God bless....
Post by: Colonel32 on August 01, 2004, 01:28:00 PM
Neither of you can know who's right, why not just accept your books say something different and accept each other.
Jesusphreak: you seem to be appalled that some of the LDS literature can be taken as racist. Do you feel the same way when you read some of the Christian scripture about women. The whole slaving your daughter thing, that always bothered me.
Post by: jesusphreak on August 01, 2004, 08:02:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| This is hilarious. Do you guys realize your arguing on the point that "my book says your wrong". Neither of you can know who's right, why not just accept your books say something different and accept each other. |
To me, it doesn't come down to books. The Bible claims to be the Word of God, and if it is, it carries all the weight of being the Word of God. Truth is, I've seen things in my life over and over that teach me without a doubt that God is real. These things only started happening once I became a Christian. Plus, the Bible is the most archaelogically tested book in the world, and archaelogists still hold it up. Not to mention that, but the prophecies are absolutely incredible. Over and over, the prophets speaking to the detail of cities falling, how nations would fall, exact dates of events, etc, etc....
And it simply see God move in my life let's me know that God is real. I think it's serious when religions that Satan is using are influencing other people. It's not just a book to me. So,....
| QUOTE |
| you seem to be appalled that some of the LDS literature can be taken as racist. Do you feel the same way when you read some of the Christian scripture about women. The whole slaving your daughter thing, that always bothered me. |
Would you like to bring that up for me? Do you have a reference?
Post by: Colonel32 on August 01, 2004, 09:29:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Would you like to bring that up for me? Do you have a reference? |
(Exodus 21:7-10) would be a good place to start. I'm sure you know this...
There are thousands of religions Jesusphreak. All of them believe they are right as we've seen in this thread. You said the Christian bible is the word of God, but who decided that... St Paul? Isn't that similiar to what Mohammed did with Islam. I will pray for you, and hope that you will find patience and acceptance for religions other than your own. In the end everyone is praying to the same God, just different interpretations of Him.
Post by: jesusphreak on August 01, 2004, 10:37:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| you seem to be appalled that some of the LDS literature can be taken as racist. Do you feel the same way when you read some of the Christian scripture about women. The whole slaving your daughter thing, that always bothered me. |
Maybe you should read the passage as a whole:
7 "If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as menservants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, [2] he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.
Are you not seeing this? The rights that the Hebrews gave to women was above and beyond what any other culture in the world at that time did. Look at all that the man is required to do. He must let her be redeemeed if he does not like her. He must grant her the rights of a daughter if she marries his son. He must not deprive his first wife of material possessions, and if he cannot, she must go free.
And actually, if you look further into it and if you look into other translations. This passage seems to be talking about marriage. KJV: "
8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed"
This passage isn't a matter of women slaves. It more than likely is a matter of dowry, and no matter what it is, the fact remains, these rights are way more "liberal" than any other culture of the time period.
I think God was providing for women just as much as he provided for men. If you will look even more into the Law, you will see all kinds of women's rights, which is incredible for the time. It's incredible even for now.
Not to mention, Christ came to make the Law perfect. And he doesn't differentiate between Jew and Gentile, man and woman, slave or free, they are all one in Christ Jesus.
For example, Moses gave a law of divorce.
As God said in Malachi, "I hate divorce".
In Matthew we read, "Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning."
So, these laws set forward to the Hebrew people were not the perfect and exact way God wanted us to live. He permitted us to live this way due to the sinful nature, and his grace was at work the entire time, forgiving us for our sinful nature.
Now that Christ has come, and he has died to forgive us of our sinful nature, we no longer live under the old law that could never be perfect.
The law was only a way that the Hebrews should live under the current system of things. They had not yet had God come down and die in order to break the power of sin. They lived under sin, but God gave them grace, and God forgave them.
But anway, I digress.
If as you say, all of the religions of the world are different interpretations of the same God, then something is going on here.
Christ says, "I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes through the Father except through me".
Muhammad commanded the Christians and Jews be killed if they did not convert.
Muhammad said that he was God's most important prophet and those who did not live a life that had more good than bad, then the person would go to hell.
Buddha said that there was no such things as sin (and for that matter no such thing as God) and the way to oneness was through leaving desires (and suffering behind).
Hinduism claims so many things it isn't even funny. Gandhi said, "God is truth." This chair I'm sitting in is true, is it God?
No Colonel, what you are saying cannot be true. The nature of things tells us that there is an on and off, a right and a wrong.
You only have a few options here. If more than one of these men was telling the truth about all that happened, then God is totally contradictory. He completely changes his ways. We can trust him no more than any normal person. Do you want that to be your God?
If these men did not receive messages from God, as they claimed, then they were complete liars; why should we follow anything that they say?
No, but the nature of things tells us that there is someone that exists beyond us. All of these religions cannot be right. They cannot be all telling the truth, or as I've said, God is a complete liar.
But if God is not a complete liar, and at one time through history he has spoken through one man or another, then there is a truth, there is a right way to him.
Here is something to think about. Christianity is the only religion in which God reaches out to people to provide a way to him.
Think about it. In Christianity, the only way that you will get to heaven is by accepting what God has done for you: died for your sins. There's nothing you can do to earn your way to heaven.
But think about this:
Islam: you must have more good deeds than bad
Mormonism: you may get to the first level of heaven, but to get to any of the others, you must have good works
Buddhism: you must seek your own way to Nirvana
Judaism: again, you must be a "good" person
It seems more likely to me, that there isn't one God that we are all misconstruing or are telling lies about or that he's telling lies about himself.
It seems to me that there is one God, one living God, who has provided a way to for us to him through his death. And it seems to me that there is one liar, one Satan, who truly is "the father of lies", and he is the one propagating all of these other religions.
You can't debate it. Christianity's way of salvation is unique.
Religion is man making his way to God. Christianity is God making his way to man.
Post by: melon on August 02, 2004, 02:21:00 AM
Why is christianity beter than islam whaen you both worship the same god, a lot of the same religous figures such as Abraham, even Jesus is worshiped by both!
Post by: thomes08 on August 02, 2004, 09:06:00 AM
Post by: Baner on August 02, 2004, 09:51:00 AM
Post by: Mr. Chips on August 02, 2004, 12:13:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Why is christianity beter than islam whaen you both worship the same god, a lot of the same religous figures such as Abraham, even Jesus is worshiped by both! |
muslims worship Jesus?
Post by: Colonel32 on August 02, 2004, 01:53:00 PM
| QUOTE (Mr. Chips @ Aug 2 2004, 08:16 PM) |
| muslims worship Jesus? |
Well they worship God. Jesus was one of their prophets. It's very similiar in it's roots though.
Satan = Dajjal or Shaitan
Adam and Eve, Moses and the children of Israel are all in the Qu'ran
The largest difference is that the Islam faith does not follow the holy trinity or Paul's version of how Christos died.
Post by: melon on August 02, 2004, 01:58:00 PM
it was the same religion as christianity untill Abraham had his two sons, job and isaac, i know there spelt wrong but..
muslims followed the teachings of one son and christians the teaching of the other.
Post by: nemt on August 02, 2004, 02:36:00 PM
| QUOTE (melon @ Aug 2 2004, 06:01 PM) |
| they see him as a prophet rather than the sun of god, but in the bible one of the books, i think luke consistently describes him as a prophet and doesnt mention he is the son of god. it was the same religion as christianity untill Abraham had his two sons, job and isaac, i know there spelt wrong but.. muslims followed the teachings of one son and christians the teaching of the other. |
You are completely incorrect, about both the origins of islam, and the gospels' depiction of jesus.
Post by: Mr. Chips on August 02, 2004, 06:53:00 PM
maybe he could have tried to be polite and helpful, though...
in the gospel, Jesus says "I am the son of God" many times. Including Luke.
The difference between a prophet and a God is huge.
just because he mispelt Jacob and Isaac doesn't make someone a complete idiot, after all he apologized.
Post by: melon on August 03, 2004, 05:08:00 AM
there you go nemt, proof muslims where the same religion untill Abraham and his son, then they branched off.
Post by: Colonel32 on August 07, 2004, 12:58:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Basically, there was Judaism, and from Judaism came Christianity, and from a meld of Judaism and Christianity came Islam.... |
And all three are identified as what by theologists?
Abrahamic religions.