Results 1 to 30 of 116

Thread: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Member Megas Methuselah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Prairie Grasslands
    Posts
    5,040

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Mormans think they know more about me and my history than I do myself. They preach to me. They try to make me white. And that last "apostle" who tried preaching to me downtown had a lisp. I said nothing, turned my back, and walked away.

    This isn't his promised land. He doesn't belong here. He was fat and white.

  2. #2
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,408
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Wha? How do you make someone "white"?
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  3. #3
    Dux Nova Scotia Member lars573's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Halifax NewScotland Canada
    Posts
    4,114

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Mormons believe that the Aboriginal peoples of the Americas are decended from groups of Israelites who, by the invisible sky gods magic, landed in the new world.
    If you havin' skyrim problems I feel bad for you son.. I dodged 99 arrows but my knee took one.

    VENI, VIDI, NATES CALCE CONCIDI

    I came, I saw, I kicked ass

  4. #4
    Dragonslayer Emeritus Senior Member Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Norge
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
    Temporal inheritanace, not his salvation.
    I am pretty sure every non-evangelical denomination agrees that he lost his salvation with his Bathsheba stunt.
    How does that verse in any way suggest that Sunday would be the new sabbath, as opposed to Saturday? Not the I support a Saturday sabbath either, I believe the ceremonial aspect of the commandment was fulfiled in Christ.
    Setting the infallible canon aside, all offspring of the original church worshiped on the first day of the week. If this was a Roman construct, then the orthodox, Coptic and Armenian churches would still worship on a Saturday. Christ was resurrected on a Sunday and since the church was all about this event - it became the new day of worship. A new covenant under new rules (mosaic Sabbath strictness done away with). Obviously Christ wanted the breaking of bread to be done periodically and in remembrance of him and his work. A ceremonial worship of the father through Christ's sacrifice, and done on the first day of the week hence forth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuchip View Post
    In those verses he is talking about the Nephites specifically. AFAIK the Isrealites in Jerusalem never knew about Jesus until his birth.

    I think you are overlooking the obvious. If you remember the exodus of the families of Lehi and Ishmael , the story makes a point of going back to get the Manasseh scriptures (brass plates) from the clan/tribe head. All the prophets from Adam and down to the time when they left was found on these plates in addition to a genealogical record of their tribe - through Joseph and to Adam.
    Jacob (the author of my quote) was a contemporary with Lehi and Nephi and as such when he refers to all the prophets, it would be the record of prophets of Israel that they brought with them. In other words - he claim that they knew of Christ and worshiped Christ from Adam through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the father of Joseph and the twelve tribes. Hence - ancient Jerusalem knew of Christ before his time (If we should base anything on your BoM).

    Quote Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah View Post
    Mor[e]mans think they know more about me and my history than I do myself. They preach to me. They try to make me white. And that last "apostle" who tried preaching to me downtown had a lisp. I said nothing, turned my back, and walked away.
    It seems we share common ancestry Megas. You from Lehi and me from Odin, from the same tribe of Joseph.
    Last edited by Sigurd; 02-10-2011 at 12:07.
    Status Emeritus

  5. #5
    Senior Member Senior Member Fisherking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East of Augusta Vindelicorum
    Posts
    5,575

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Oh drat!

    Sunday Sabbath?

    It is my understanding that it may have come from the Celtic Church and was adopted because that was the traditional holey day of the previous religion. As was preaching from a pulpit.

    This may sound outrageous but remember who re-Christianized Europe after the fall of Rome.


    Education: that which reveals to the wise,
    and conceals from the stupid,
    the vast limits of their knowledge.
    Mark Twain

  6. #6
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,408
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    I think that is just a coincidence, theres only 7 days in a week after all.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  7. #7
    Ranting madman of the .org Senior Member Fly Shoot Champion, Helicopter Champion, Pedestrian Killer Champion, Sharpshooter Champion, NFS Underground Champion Rhyfelwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    In a hopeless place with no future
    Posts
    8,646

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisherking View Post
    Oh drat!

    Sunday Sabbath?

    It is my understanding that it may have come from the Celtic Church and was adopted because that was the traditional holey day of the previous religion. As was preaching from a pulpit.

    This may sound outrageous but remember who re-Christianized Europe after the fall of Rome.
    Ah yes, the Celtic Church, a favourite topic of discussion in Northern Ireland where the Protestants/Catholics want to prove they were there first.

    Well, according to some pamphlets I have on St. Patrick (a Protestant and a Briton apparently, although he is seriously from my little hometown!), the early Celtic Church were Saturday Sabbatarians.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    I am pretty sure every non-evangelical denomination agrees that he lost his salvation with his Bathsheba stunt.
    non-evangelical = bad and rejects the Gospel!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    Setting the infallible canon aside, all offspring of the original church worshiped on the first day of the week. If this was a Roman construct, then the orthodox, Coptic and Armenian churches would still worship on a Saturday. Christ was resurrected on a Sunday and since the church was all about this event - it became the new day of worship. A new covenant under new rules (mosaic Sabbath strictness done away with). Obviously Christ wanted the breaking of bread to be done periodically and in remembrance of him and his work. A ceremonial worship of the father through Christ's sacrifice, and done on the first day of the week hence forth.
    That they happened to worship on the first day of the week does not suggest any sort of superstitious reverence of a holy day. I go to church every Sunday, I also go to football every Saturday...

    The observance of days is explicitly condemned by Paul (Galatians 4:9-11).
    At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.

  8. #8
    Dragonslayer Emeritus Senior Member Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Norge
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
    Well, according to some pamphlets I have..
    I would not trust "some pamphlets" that some self-proclaimed doctor of a church wrote on any subject. I have read pamphlets about Mormons that were utterly rubbish and based on clear lies. Also - some of these doctors have written about how Islam is a constructed religion and that the culprits were the Catholic Church. And let's not get into the pamphlets about how the Scots are really one of the lost tribes of Israel.

    non-evangelical = bad and rejects the Gospel!
    What should I call them?
    It is the new age Christendom with their saved by grace, no need for baptism, just say the name Jesus three times and you are guarantied salvation even if you murder small babies the rest of your life, type of cults I am trying to not-name here.
    All based on individuals that one day decides to interpret the not-so-infallible-anymore book of tampered-with text in a new way, that might have been the way the authors (or the not so helpful co-writers) intended it to be. Behold, a new sect has been born and can be added to the 35 000 others that each claim they are the only one that leads to salvation. All the rest can burn in hell.
    We are on the verge of getting an explosion of Christian extremists. The Bible is not infallible as it is. It never was.
    Athanasius and cronies that suggested the compilation of books that ended up with "the book" would turn in their graves if they found out what came of their work.
    The foundation on which these individuals build their church is flawed and for the sake of saving lives, you should tear these constructions down. It is what any sound inspector would recommend.
    Last edited by Sigurd; 02-11-2011 at 10:25.
    Status Emeritus

  9. #9
    Ranting madman of the .org Senior Member Fly Shoot Champion, Helicopter Champion, Pedestrian Killer Champion, Sharpshooter Champion, NFS Underground Champion Rhyfelwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    In a hopeless place with no future
    Posts
    8,646

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    I would not trust "some pamphlets" that some self-proclaimed doctor of a church wrote on any subject. I have read pamphlets about Mormons that were utterly rubbish and based on clear lies. Also - some of these doctors have written about how Islam is a constructed religion and that the culprits were the Catholic Church. And let's not get into the pamphlets about how the Scots are really one of the lost tribes of Israel.
    Heh, I didnt' say I believed them all, I just think they're interesting. Makes a change from the healf-hearted liberal tripe you get these days that seems to dominate mainstream Christianity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    What should I call them?
    It is the new age Christendom with their saved by grace, no need for baptism, just say the name Jesus three times and you are guarantied salvation even if you murder small babies the rest of your life, type of cults I am trying to not-name here.
    All based on individuals that one day decides to interpret the not-so-infallible-anymore book of tampered-with text in a new way, that might have been the way the authors (or the not so helpful co-writers) intended it to be. Behold, a new sect has been born and can be added to the 35 000 others that each claim they are the only one that leads to salvation. All the rest can burn in hell.
    @bolded bit in particular - "new age" I am not. Yes I believe in salvation by faith through grace like any Protestant does, and I don't agree with water baptism, so what. I most definitely do not agree with the modern Evangelical notion that you just say the 'sinners prayer' and that's all you need to do, its almost a form of salvation through works they have. Nope, you can't murder babies your whole life, faith without works is dead after all, the tree is known by its fruit, strive to make your calling sure etc...

    Also, just to point out... Jesus agrees with the Evangelicas (and Mormons apparently) in that David did look to him for salvation. In Matthew 22:40-6, Jesus shows how David called to him, "How then doth David in spirit call him Lord"...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    We are on the verge of getting an explosion of Christian extremists. The Bible is not infallible as it is. It never was.
    Athanasius and cronies that suggested the compilation of books that ended up with "the book" would turn in their graves if they found out what came of their work.
    The foundation on which these individuals build their church is flawed and for the sake of saving lives, you should tear these constructions down. It is what any sound inspector would recommend.
    tbh I think there's a lot of hype surrounding the formation of the canon. There was no conspiracy at Nicaea, it was more or less widely accepted throughout Christendom long before Hippo. Heck even within the Pauline epistles they refer to themselves as scripture.
    Last edited by Rhyfelwyr; 02-11-2011 at 18:17.
    At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.

  10. #10
    Dragonslayer Emeritus Senior Member Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Norge
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr View Post
    Yes I believe in salvation by faith through grace like any Protestant does, and I don't agree with water baptism, so what. I most definitely do not agree with the modern Evangelical notion that you just say the 'sinners prayer' and that's all you need to do, its almost a form of salvation through works they have. Nope, you can't murder babies your whole life, faith without works is dead after all, the tree is known by its fruit, strive to make your calling sure etc...
    I think all Christian denominations including Mormonism and Catholicism believes in salvation through the grace of God. If not they would deny the very scriptures they uphold as truth. The disagreement would be in how you become a Christan worthy of His grace.
    But baptism? I think it odd that any Christian denomination would question the ordinance of baptism. Your very God did this. Why? if he was sinless without blemish? Why would he conform to a Jewish tradition if it was not necessary? Something along 'Jesus is the way and the light, follow his example', would be a clue. Or Jesus followed all Gods commandments, even though he didn't need to.
    Also, just to point out... Jesus agrees with the Evangelicas (and Mormons apparently) in that David did look to him for salvation. In Matthew 22:40-6, Jesus shows how David called to him, "How then doth David in spirit call him Lord"...
    You Christians should agree on this. Some say David didn't forfeit his salvation, others damn him to hell. Why is it so important that David retained his salvation despite of murder and adultery - sins that "the infallible bible" says will result in not inheriting the Kingdom of God.
    tbh I think there's a lot of hype surrounding the formation of the canon. There was no conspiracy at Nicaea, it was more or less widely accepted throughout Christendom long before Hippo. Heck even within the Pauline epistles they refer to themselves as scripture.
    So you do hold to an infallible Bible? the 66 books, no more no less. You do realize that there are references to other books in the Bible, which are not a part of the Bible. Books and letters quoted as scripture, yet not found in the canon (yes even Pauline epistles referring to previous epistles which are not found in the Bible).
    And... There were no compiled volumes of scriptures like the Bible at the time of Hippo. They were all separate books. I find it especially amusing when Christians believing in an infallible Bible quote Revelations to support a closed canon. Yeah.. John wrote revelations on the few blank pages left after they compiled the 65 books of the old and new testament.
    Status Emeritus

  11. #11
    Ranting madman of the .org Senior Member Fly Shoot Champion, Helicopter Champion, Pedestrian Killer Champion, Sharpshooter Champion, NFS Underground Champion Rhyfelwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    In a hopeless place with no future
    Posts
    8,646

    Default Re: Why is OK to harrass mormons?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    I think all Christian denominations including Mormonism and Catholicism believes in salvation through the grace of God. If not they would deny the very scriptures they uphold as truth. The disagreement would be in how you become a Christan worthy of His grace.
    But baptism? I think it odd that any Christian denomination would question the ordinance of baptism. Your very God did this. Why? if he was sinless without blemish? Why would he conform to a Jewish tradition if it was not necessary? Something along 'Jesus is the way and the light, follow his example', would be a clue. Or Jesus followed all Gods commandments, even though he didn't need to.
    Jesus, as a Jew, naturally observed the Jewish traditions. He came to fulfill the law after all. But now they are fulfilled, we are no longer bound by a ceremonial law but by the law of Christ, which the ceremonial law merely foreshadowed (see Hebrews).

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    You Christians should agree on this. Some say David didn't forfeit his salvation, others damn him to hell. Why is it so important that David retained his salvation despite of murder and adultery - sins that "the infallible bible" says will result in not inheriting the Kingdom of God.
    Why does it matter whether or not professed Christians agree on the matter, at the end of the day Jesus give a plain answer to the pharisees.

    Also, so what if David committed murder and adultery, you think that puts him beyond salvation while we can still have it? Do you think we are not murderers and adulterers? If you have been angry at someone or insulted them Jesus says you will face the council just as if you killed someone (Matthew 5:21-2). And if you look upon a women with lust, you have committed adultery (Matthew 5:27-8).

    That in all likelihood makes us both murderers and adulterers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    So you do hold to an infallible Bible? the 66 books, no more no less. You do realize that there are references to other books in the Bible, which are not a part of the Bible. Books and letters quoted as scripture, yet not found in the canon (yes even Pauline epistles referring to previous epistles which are not found in the Bible).
    And... There were no compiled volumes of scriptures like the Bible at the time of Hippo. They were all separate books. I find it especially amusing when Christians believing in an infallible Bible quote Revelations to support a closed canon. Yeah.. John wrote revelations on the few blank pages left after they compiled the 65 books of the old and new testament.
    Yes I know the verse you are referring to and obviously John was only talking about the Book of Revelation. I trust the consensus that existed in early Christendom, and given the fact that 'core' scriptures refer to themselves as scripture and the idea of a New Covenant scripture to complement the old one is obvious, I trust God delivered the true scripture to the church.
    Last edited by Rhyfelwyr; 02-15-2011 at 14:35.
    At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO