Some non-mormon links the smarter they are, the harder they fall for cults? By the way, here are some links that may be of interest to you:
Randolfo If you read my last post before I deleted it I apologize for the tone. I was in a bad mood when I wrote it. You are welcome to ask me any question and I will see if I can answer it. I only ask that you keep this forum civil. We have managed to keep it very civil so far. Just like I said at the beginning of this thread. I am not trying to convert anyone in this forum. I know that most the writers in this forum are atheists and their only real interest in reading what I write is just to learn what the LDS church is about from an actual Mormon. I am sure that they are amused when we theists beat each other up over doctrine.
I'm not against polygamy, it should be allowed. Mormonism in general is still secret and reclusive. No one is allowed in the temples that isn't Mormon, and they don't even want to say what goes on there, like postumous conversion of Jews, and after-life marriages. Their very secrecy is a sign of their weakness, they can't confront reality. They are caught up in apocolyptic nonsense. You should have seen the two Mormons where I used to work. Remember that whole millenium bug silliness? I went into their office one day and it was stacked ceiling high with plastic buckets. They told me they ordered them special to stockpile food and water for when society broke down. Shortly after that, I walked into a small workshop we had, and one of them was in there with a rifle, partially disassembled, fixing the stock or something for the coming anarchy. In any other company, he would have been fired right away, but go figure, he was one of the top executives. He knew nothing about me, but whenever he walked by my office he goes, "hey liberals!". I guess all creative people are liberals. And they thought we were the weird ones.
when trouble starts, get out of his way mormons are very goal oriented, check out how many companies they own or control http://www.lookat.ch/index.php/article/articleview/100/1/79 http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/mormons.htm http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/lhm1097b.htm
no need, you said what you believed & probably feel the need to defend it ok, just don't get mad so easily, this is an open forum, nobody has to agree with either of us, or we, with each other or anyone else then why did you start it? are you being honest with yourself or with us? so? &? I don't agree with what you believe, I would have to deny my people (Mexicans) to accept even one iota from the BoM. plus, I view mormons as polytheistic, so, the LDS is 'closet' pagan, it beat out Scientology by a 100 years. so, what do we have in common? Jesus? nope, your 'jesus' is hindu or something. & calling your church "The Church of Jesus Christ of LDS" doesn't make it any more "christian" than, lets say, islam, they believe in jesus too, just ask them Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Once we are exalted we will be like God, but he will still be our God. We will always worship him as such.
Jenyar. It is like you will never be your father, even when you become a father yourself. You will always revere your father as such.
The only reason for that is priority, as I said. If God is no more than an honorary title for the arch-patriarch of humanity, then I can certainly understand why Brigham Young believed Adam was God the Father. "Adam is our Father and God, ... the Prophet and Apostle Brigham has declared it, and that it is the word of the Lord." -- Franklin D. RichardsIt sounds like ambiguous terminology to me: either God is like us (like the first Adam), or He is not. Simply calling him "Father" or even "God" doesn't say much, especially because Mormon teaching makes those titles somewhat common -- in fact, they must be the two most common words in your belief, because you say they eventually apply to all men in the same sense. The is no qualitative difference between your children's relationship with you, and your relationship with your biological father. What was the point of Jesus saying, call no man Father or Master "for you have one Father, and he is in heaven" (Matt.23), if those titles aren't reserved for God in some sense, and it must clearly be in a different sense than mere biological priority -- or we should have had trouble addressing our parents that way. "For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." -- Matt. 23:12 "That exaltation which the saints of all ages have so devoutly sought is godhood itself." -- Bruce McConkieIf exaltation is gained by leading a "dynamic, industrious, and completely righteous life", then one is exalting oneself, very literally. I am he: before me there was no God formed neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour. (Isaiah 43:10-11) I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
Jenyar Are you saying that God cannot make us Gods ourselves if he wanted to? And if he can then why woudn't he? Adam can be considered our father because he is the father of humanity. He is also a God. He helped create the heavens and the Earth. It does not mean that God the Father and Adam are the same being. Brigham Young never tought they were the same being.
That's not a valid argument and you know it. If God can make trees grow upside down, why wouldn't He? The most obvious answer is: He didn't.God may appoint us to be 'gods' and 'sons of God' (synonymous in Ps.82:6), but then He has already done so, in our present state -- it is not something we have or even could attain. "He called them 'gods', to whom the word of God came" (John 10:35). Did you check the link I provided? It has scans of the original documents. How many Fathers do we have according to Jesus? Yet Brigham Young said: "How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed unto me--namely that Adam is our Father and our God... Our father Adam helped to make this earth ... Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or who ever will come upon the earth." (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 18, 1873)If it were a mere confusion of terms, say, he uses "gods" where the Bible uses "sons of God", it might have been a little better, barely. God may declare anyone He chooses, to be his children. But this is something else. You are talking about gods of the same order as the One and only true God -- polytheism. Not a Trinity, not even a troika of three separate gods acting with one purpose, but a whole pantheon of gods. Isaiah 45:18 For this is what the LORD says — he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited — he says: I am the LORD, and there is no other.Isaiah says only one God created heaven and earth: YHWH (translated 'the LORD'), and there is no other. You say Adam, or Michael the archangel, or even Jesus the separate God, "helped" God the Father. Who do we believe? You might be tempted to class these Creator-gods into one "Creator" category, but where does this leave your exalted gods? Those who are "of the same species" as the Creator God? Jeremiah says it quite strongly: "These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens." (Jer.10:11)
Jenyar. Here are some websites on the subject of the "Adam God theory". Just to let you know the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has officially denounced this theory. The LDS church does not and has never taught the theory as official doctrine of the church. This includes Brigham Youngs time. Read these websites regarding the Adam-God Theory. http://www.lightplanet.com/response/answers/isgodadam.htm http://www.lightplanet.com/response/adam-god.htm http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Relationships.shtml#adam http://www.aliveonline.com/ldspapers/AdamGod.pdf http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/response/qa/adam_god.htm http://www.wasatchnet.net/users/ewatson/7AdamGod.htm On the question of whether we can become Gods ourselves. Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. If we are "joint-heirs" with Christ then we recieve every thing that Christ himself has been givin. Are you denying that Christ is a God? "Ye are gods" Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High Christ reiterated this statement in John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? Janyar do you believe in a God that promises everything to his children, or do you believe in a God that is egotistical and only created us for his sole benefit? One thing that atheists have a point is that so many religions teach about a self serving; keep everything for himself, deity. The God I worship is not all about himself. He is all about glorifying others that they may enjoy all that he has. He does not slam the door shut to Godhood from everybody but himself. He did not create us and put us through pain and hardship in this world simply so we could go to heaven and stare at him forever. That serves no purpose for us and it serves no purpose for God. God commands us to worship and obey him for our sakes not his. He wants us to return to him and he has shown us the way. I would even boldly state that anyone that teaches against the divine potential of man is speaking blasphemy and defaming God. You are calling him a selfish, egomaniacal, miser. I reject your evil description of our Father in Heaven. Yours is the doctrine of Satan, not of a loving God.
I was out on an archaeological dig in Porterville, Ca. when I noticed that one of my classmates was wearing this really cool t-shirt, it had a Mayan glyph, with the words "it came to pass" underneath. at that time Mayan was not fully translated (early 80's), so I asked him where he got it, & why it said that under it. He explained that it was the translation & I basically called him a liar. ever since, I've seen Mormonism as a covert attempt to steal Mexican history, by giving it to fake Jews. No real Jew would eat swine & not practice customs, which the BoM ignores, because JS didn't know enough to put them in the BoM. So, its a lie, a book of fiction
Anthropomorphization completed. In order to make yourself be able to believe in God, you have tailored God to your human needs (so as to not feel so helpless before God's greatness), made a god-like human ideal and postulated it as "God". And after that, to still feel good about yourselves, you have given yourself godly potential. Niiiiiiiiice. And God's wrath will come upon you. With fury and with anger, you little man. You are taking pride in your own faith, and for this, you will be severely punished.
although i am aware of the potential and actual consequences that can happen to people who defy and insult others' gods...ie., Salman Rushdie, long long list of pople threatened, tortured, and murderd for the simple reason of questioning beliefs and sysmbols of anothers; religion but the whole game also MAKEs me laugh. the abusrdity of it. for a kick off....they posit this almighty god, yeah. who is SOOO superior to us humans, omni this onmi that. yet if anyone says anything against this super'dude' they rally round him like he's some petty gang leader of something. thus implying their great mighty god needs their cliquish protection ...hehe. but what it really shows up is that all along it Is that. it Is simply a clique holdin fast and clinging for dear life to some dodgy dgoma!
Randolfo You will not find in any official Mormon documents or any pronouncements that state that the Mayans or any known indigenous people living today are the direct lineage to the Book of Mormon people. The official church position is that we do not know and it may or may not ever be revealed in this life. There have been many cultures that have come and gone without our knowledge. It is possible that the Book of Mormon peoples both Nephites and Lamanites were completely destroyed and all genetic markings went with them. It is possible that some did survive and there may be some remnant. The Church does not take a position on who the people were or even where the BoM took place. We just know it was somewhere on the American Continent. The Book of Mormon is very vague on geography. It does talk about a "narrow neck" of land so many speculate that could be Central America. It could also be a mountain valley too. We do not know. There have been many speculations about the Mayans because they do have possible similarities. Their architecture and writing have similarities to ancient Middle Eastern and Egyptian cultures. Enough that even non-Mormon archeologists acknowledge that there may be some kind of connection. But just like I said the LDS church itself makes absolutely no claims. I know there is a very lucrative cottage industry in southern Mexico and Central America that brings many LDS people down there for tours based on the Book of Mormon. None of these are sanctioned or endorsed by the LDS church. So you should not be offended by the church trying to change your peoples culture or whatever. However I do not know why you would be offended by the prospect of Christ himself personally visiting them after his resurrection? This is a much better legacy for the Mayan people than the modern view of them as being heathens engaging in human sacrifice and canabalism isn't it?
