Umm, Achebe, it may be too late, but DON'T (please). Even I, the devil-incarnate, would not try to question someone's faith at a Thanksgiving get-together.
I am not playing the role of wounded victim... but rather I think I run a greater risk than DREAMer. No offense, but DREAMer could say he believes in just about anything and it would have no bearing on relationships needed to run this site, clutchcity.net. I don't have that luxury... I don't wish to throw myself in to the religious ring on my own Rockets site (it's bad enough I've gotten in to the political side of things), and I think it's crystal clear why that should be respected. I hope this does not offend anyone who enjoys clutchcity.net on a very personal level. If you want to learn about what Mormons believe, you could read a lot at their website <a href="http://www.lds.org">lds.org</a> -- the very basic outline of Mormon beliefs are called the <A href="http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,106-1-2-1,FF.html">Articles of Faith</a> I stepped in this thread for one reason: to correct a false statement that Mormons do not believe in Jesus Christ or strive to follow his teachings and I was completely ignored/discounted. That's a fundamental belief of Mormons and I was told by DREAMer again in response they don't have it. That's called ignorance. I can not even get DREAMer to understand or accept or respect the fact that Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, thus the term LDS) are Christians by its very definition, so how could I possibly defend the religion against a completely preposterous claim such as that Mormons "whiten" minorities? A-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y a-b-s-u-r-d. DREAMer -- If you could define what a Christian is outside of the definition that I have provided, please do so. However, based on fact and the definition provided here, you've already been proven wrong. And the fact you discount it so badly is why I have yet to respond to you. BTW, you said "Then why not discount what I'm saying" -- that's exactly what I've done. Now you seem to be calling me out on it. So, here we go. DREAMer can now get the Bible-bash session he craves. Also, add me as the 4th source on your list. I've studied Mormonism for about 16 years now and served a two-year mission in Argentina. The book you're reading from to make factual assumptions about Mormons is called Anti-Mormon literature. I knew that was where you were getting your info because most of it is taken verbatim off of it and 90% of it is false as you'll see clearly here. Thus, when you say "I also can't tell (you) that none of what's in his book is true", you're right: 1 thing (eternal marriage) of the roughly 5-10 doctinal pieces you posted as fact is close enough to be called accurate. The rest are either twisted or pure fiction. Some of this is taken straight from documented responses to these accusations. They believe that Jesus and Satan are biological brothers..... Do you have any brothers? I do. That's how Mormons believe Jesus and Satan are related. They believe that God had sex with his wife and gave birth to both Jesus and Satan, along with other children. FALSE. Anti-Mormons often twist Mormon doctrines out of context to make people falsely believe that Latter-Day Saints denigrate Jesus and consider Satan and the Lord to be equals. Of course, anyone familiar with Mormon beliefs about Jesus Christ knows that we have the utmost respect and reverence for Our Savior and Redeemer. First, we believe that Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God the Father (and is therefore divine) and the mortal virgin Mary. Satan, a malignant spirit, does not share this parental heritage of Jesus, and cannot be considered divine in any respect. Therefore, in the usual way that we speak of brothers and sisters, Jesus and Satan are not brothers. However, Latter-day Saints believe that God is our Father in Heaven. Before we came to this world, we all lived as spirits under his care and guidance. We believe that God begat or created the spirits of Jesus, Lucifer, and all of the human family as his children. Our Heavenly Father is literally the father of our spirits. Jesus Christ is considered the preeminent "firstborn" or "firstbegotten". So it can be said that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers, in the sense of both being spiritually begotten by the Father, but it is a misrepresentation to say so without giving the contextual background. Whatever similarities in background exist between Jesus and Satan pale compared to the differences. Jesus is the Beloved and Chosen, who is the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh. It is using this Anti-Mormon statement that DREAMer has badly twisted Mormon beliefs in to Satan-Jesus being brothers, as his own brothers, and God "having sex". And can you not see how that is a sensationalistic statement to make Mormons look bad? When you say "God had sex with his wife" I'm wondering if you also have the same respect and tone for your friends and family.... "Hey everybody!! Dan had sex with his wife and he's now going to be a father!" I don't think many like to visualize their God "having sex" so already you've tried to twist badly the perception of the Mormon religion. They believe that Jesus is only the god of Earth, and that every planet has (or will eventually have) it's own god... It's not the same Jesus Christ of the Bible. (Mormons) have taken the name Jesus and created a whole new being with an entirely different history. FALSE. This is a quote from LDS historian W. John Walsh: <UL>"Latter-day Saints believe in the Jesus who was the pre-existent Word of the Father; that was the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; that was the God of Abraham , Isaac, and Jacob; that was the Only Begotten Son of God who was born to the virgin Mary in the town of Bethlehem; that was baptized by John; that healed the sick and raised the dead, that walked on water and multiplied loaves and fishes; that set a perfect example for human beings to imitate and that humans have an obligation to follow his example in all things. Most important of all, we believe that he suffered and died on the cross as a volunteer sacrifice for humanity in order to bring about an atonement through the shedding of his blood. We believe that he was physically resurrected and that he ascended into the heavens, from which he will come at the end of this world to establish his kingdom upon the earth and eventually to judge both the living and the dead. Finally, we believe in the Jesus who is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations. Now that we have established the identity of the Jesus Christ in whom Latter-day Saints believe, may I ask who is the Jesus in whom you believe?"[/list] I say again: It takes a tremendous ego to tell someone they don't believe in the true Jesus Christ -- their Jesus Christ. With that attitude, don't you have some worlds to conquer? People to kill if they don't believe as you do? They believe in the Book of Mormons, even though in the Book of Revelations it states that there will be no additions to the Word of God. This is a translation of the Bible according to your beliefs. Nowhere in Revelation does it say there will be no additions to the "Word of God", and for crying out loud you quoted the scripture! "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." For starters, when the Apostle John wrote this verse, the Bible as you have it in your hand was not compiled yet, so how could John be referring to the entire Bible? Could the answer be he wasn't? Could the answer be he was referring to the Book of Revelation? Also, most Biblical scholars believe the Book of Revelation was not the last book in the Bible to be written even though it is the last chapter in the book. So which chapters of the Bible do we throw out? Moses also said in Deuteronomy 4:2: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." You would lose the New Testament in that case. Here's the kicker... it doesn't matter if you believe this or not because I'm sure you don't, but it already has created enough doubt and makes enough sense to make me and I'm sure anyone else wonder why in the world you would make such a narrow, closed-minded assumption that my Jesus Christ has suddenly become your cat. They believe that they are on an immensely long journey of enlightenment with godhood being their reward. In fact, they believe they will (when I say they, I mean only the men) become gods of their own planet, and with the wife they married here on Earth they will provide the seeds to populate their own planet. FALSE. "Immensely long journey of enlightenment"? Why? Because we believe this life is a trial? Latter-day Saints believe our Heavenly Father has given us this mortal life to become more like him. Those who are true and faithful in all things will sit in the throne of Christ. (Rev 3:21) They will have the name of God the Father placed upon them (Rev 14:1) We believe that they shall be "heirs of God, and joint-heirs of Christ" (Rom 8:17). What shall the faithful inherit? ALL THINGS according to scripture (Heb 1:2) <UL>"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48) "For I [am] the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I [am] holy." (Leviticus 11:45) "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." (1 John 3:2) "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." (John 14:12)[/list] We call anyone who sits in the throne of God, has God's name and attributes, and who has inherited all things (i.e. - power, dominion, knowledge) from God-----a god. Hence the scripture, "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods....I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Psalms (82:1,6) While we believe that the faithful will enjoy a life similar to our Heavenly Father, we also believe we will still be subject to and worship the God of Heaven, which is represented as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. We will never be at the same level as them or stop worshipping them, but we will be like them and enjoy a quality of life similar to theirs. They believe that minorities through their "enlightenment" proces are also going through a "whitening process" as well. RIDICULOUSLY FALSE. Isn't this similar to how the "Assembly of God" hates black people, burns Hispanics at the stake and drowns small Asian children in the Nile? Oh... I guess it's only similar in the fact that it's completely and utterly false. "Mormons still believe in hell to, you know. Not only that, they believe that all other faiths are going there, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, etc." FALSE. Mormons do not believe all Mormons are going to "heaven" and all non-Mormons "hell". We believe all will be judged by their works. TOTALLY FALSE... I mean, what more do I have to say? What other false beliefs are you going to pass off as beliefs of Mormons? Understand what you're doing: You say Rudy Tomjanovich is the coach of the Rockets. I say Rudy Tomjanovich is the coach of the Rockets. But because of some difference in opinion on what an assistant coach said or conflicting views on a play drawn up based on your translation, you say I believe your furry feline is heading up the Rockets? I don't understand that type of ignorance. I want to let everyone know I am not imposing my beliefs on anyone, but rather defending my own against someone misrepresenting them. You see, when someone of another religion tells me what they believe, I usually respond with "That's interesting" or "I did not know that"... rather than imply they are liars and impose my shallow-minded views of what I think they believe on them. I've corrected you. I've outlined what Mormons believe on the select few statements you made -- you can continue to focus on bashing that rather than discussing your own, as I've done, and you can disagree all you want. But regardless you have been proven to tell people that do not believe exactly as you do based on your translation of the Bible that they no longer hold the fundamental Christian belief in Jesus Christ, and that is scary. [This message has been edited by Clutch (edited November 23, 2000).]
Clutch: That may have been one of the most well-thought out and interesting posts EVER. That must've taken quite a while! Very impressive! My hat's off to you. Remind me never to debate you! ------------------ Time for a new cause.
Completely understood Clutch. By the way, your post rocked... I won't waste any ink bugging my friends w/ the same questions (unless it's only to ward ( ) off any boring election conversations). ------------------ It just goes to show how skewed our priorities are when Mo Taylor makes millions of dollars while some high school teacher, that can actually rebound, scrapes to make a living. If Mo were half the power forward that Charles Barkley was, he'd be 3'2" and still board more than he does now.
Clutch, I understand your hesitation to do what you just did. However, that post just added something to the small world that is the BBS. Jeff, I think the lesson is not to get into a debate with Cluth when standing on a platform of incorrect information. ------------------ EZLN
Clutch, Thank you. You have officially debunked one of my assertations - that Mormons cannot debate their religion with non-Mormons. I do reserve a minimum of 2 days and 12 hours to prepare my response (which is how long you took). This doesn't mean I'll be able to come up with something that will prove everything you've said to be false, just that I don't have the first-hand information I need to look over at this time. For now, I will try to clarify what I have said, and that has somehow been misunderstood. But, you cannot be banned, whereas that risk is there for me. I'm not saying you would do it, you may or you may not. But, that is always in the back of my mind (and possibly others) whenever I decide to post something controversial or out of the norm. I respect this reasoning though (about having to work under constraints for the good of clutchcity.net). I wish you had said that from the very beginning. I wouldn't have pressed so hard for an answer, had I thought of that. I'm not going to argue the correctness of the statement here. But, I would like to defend my use of the phrase that mentioned god having sex with his wife. My very first mention of the belief that Jesus and Satan were brothers, I used the term "biological brothers". Still, some posters said that many people consider brothers to mean different things. So, only to clarify my point, I had to break it down into terms that could not be misunderstood. Clutch, you point out that you feel disrespected by the comment. Again, I reserve the right to question the validity, but I do apologize for how you took it. Disrespect was not my intention, and I believe if anyone would reread my posts referring to that specific topic, they would come to the same conclusion. I just don't see how so many of my words can be taken out of context, when the context is just above the misrepresented post. I was making an analogy. I've learned that simple analogies work best overall, so I was trying to keep it simple. It is my belief that the Christ Mormons believe in is not the Jesus Christ of the Bible. So, in my eyes, Mormonism created another being and merely labeled him with the same name as the prophet in the Bible. This is no different than calling my cats "Jesus Christ" and worshipping them. If you don't see the analogy, then I'm sorry. No, what I'm saying is that I believe Rudy Tomjanovich is the head coach of the Rockets, but you believe some guy named Ed McGinnis is the head coach of the Rockets, and you call him Rudy Tomjanovich. You can disagree with whether I'm right or not, but you can't disagree with how I have presented that argument. Questioning my ego is one thing. Questioning my intelligence is one thing. Calling me ignorant is one thing. Saying I belong to the church of DREAMer is one thing. But, this is really crossing the line Clutch. What you are doing is setting a precedence where I (or someone who is truly "Anti-Mormon") could say something like, "Well, don't you have some planets to go be god of?". And, what good would that do? None. [This message has been edited by DREAMer (edited November 24, 2000).]
Clutch, DREAMer, and everyone else, I just read a very enlightening article on the Mormon religion in US News and World Report (Nov. 13th issue). I admit that I've been inundated with the same information that DREAMer has been posting here, and it led me to a not so positive view of the Mormon religion. However, after simply reading an article in a magazine, my ignorant views on the matter have quickly disappeared. I'm not a very religious person, even though religion and spirituality fascinates me (maybe because I know I'm not capable of being that type of person). However, I can see why Mormonism is the fastest growing religion in the world. The main reason being that it is a very comforting religion. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com and, http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
DREAMer: Your suggestion is that Clutch doesn't worship the same Jesus as the one in the Bible. What would've been more appropriate would have been to say that Mormons have different beliefs about who Jesus was than Protestant Christians do. Those beliefs do not necessarily preclude them from calling themselves Christians. They are not Protestants, but neither are Christian mystics who believe in living miracles, personal conversations with God and living a monastic life of deep prayer and meditation. Are they not Christians? Catholics certainly have a different view of Christ. In fact, in much the way the Book of Mormon has been added to the Mormon Bible, Catholics' beliefs are effected by the Apocrypha - another "addition" to the Bible. I can only assume then that Catholics would not be considered Christians by you because they believe that you cannot pray directly to Jesus but rather must go through Mary. Right? The essential belief that is required of Christianity is that Jesus was the Son of God who came to earth, died and was resurrected to take the burden of sinfulness off the backs of humans. If that is the essential belief that allows Christians entrance into heaven (and whatever other rights and priveledges come with it), then to call Mormons non-Christians simply because their beliefs in the mythical AND historic Jesus are different from your own is tantamount to calling them atheists or Satanists. It is disavowing them of their beliefs over a difference of opinion that has very little to do with what Jesus stood for or preached. That is not to say that Clutch's arguments weren't tinged with hostility but it should be expected considering he allowed his faith to be lambasted for a couple of days before really responding. What I really find disappointing is the fact that you base your beliefs on Mormonism on the teachings of people who find them inherently wrong. That is like me taking classes on physics from someone who believes that that particular science has no merit. If you don't agree with it and don't want to take the time to learn about it from more than just agents of propoganda, that's fine, but don't pretend to have info on it when you really don't. It is like me taking advice on reading Tarot cards from the two sweet little Jehovah's Witness ladies who come to my door every couple of weeks. Not only would they not have the info I sought, the only info they would have would be colored by their beliefs and not serve my purpose. Bottom line: take everything into account before proclaiming the truth about it either way. ------------------ Time for a new cause.
Clutch, I thought it was so good I decided to make part of it my new sig! I am not Mormon and am not what DREAMer is but I do preach loudly my belief in the freedom of religion. Rock on!!! ------------------ "Here's the kicker... it doesn't matter if you believe this or not because I'm sure you don't, but it already has created enough doubt and makes enough sense to make me and I'm sure anyone else wonder why in the world you would make such a narrow, closed-minded assumption that my Jesus Christ has suddenly become your cat." ***Clutch slays the religion basher known as DREAMer Rockets and Comets stayin' in Houston!
To further expound this Christianity thing, it could be easily stated that Catholics are the only Christians. They, after all, were the originators. For quite some time, the Church meant the Catholic church. Protestants came about, as the name implies, as protests against the original Catholicism. So, you see DREAMer, you are not Christian unless you are Catholic. Even if you say you only follow the bible, and not "organized religion" well, the Catholic Church created the Bible (or should I say organized and edited?). Do you really think the group that made the Bible possible would then want you to re-interpret the followings of said book? Of course, I know Baptists who claim that Catholics are not real Christians, either. DREAMer, you run no where near the risk of Clutch when voicing your opinions. Do you really think your slim possibility of getting booted off for voicing your religious views is equal to that of Clutch saying something that will then label the whole site to others and possibly lead to unforseen consequences? Clutch always must maintian the image of the site over the image of himself. What we have here is one of the most credible "fan" sites around, in time it might become something more. ------------------ EZLN
Julie... you're not helping. Guys, After my wife assured me that many of our friends wouldn't take kindly to the question "hey are you guys Christian or not" (no matter what benign stupid face I put on), I decided to refrain from such a question at the table. I did pose a few questions to my 'jack-mormon' friend watching her child play TH2 downstairs in the den though. In short, I wish I had had a pen rather than a Guiness in hand, whoa. Since I neither have scripture nor quotes I will not make any arguments here. I will suggest that what DREAMer is posting isn't merely 'Anti-Mormon' bashing. Some of it may be misconstrued, but no more so than Gore's 'inventing the internet' quote (Hell, the republicans won an election on such misconceptions, powerful that they are (in the force, och aye)). I will make a few comments: Ultra-conservatives might be against flouridization in SLC, but not necessarily in the church. It was merely a matter of years ago that the church had a revelation that allowed non-whites into the upper echelons of heaven (they've been allowed into the actual Church buildings since the 70s). This isn't 'mormon bashing' Clutch. I say this as a 'concerned friend'... if not to you then to my powerbase here in SLC. However, the other issue of race that DREAMer brought up (whitening process) is a bit out of context, IMO. Unfortunately, Clutch didn't debunk it. Clutch, you obviously know more than the rest of us on this issue, but could you (or another mormon) please post on the issue of the 'two tribes' and what DREAMer's quote actually refers to?
DREAMer feels that some of his quotes have been taken out of context by Clutch. Since they were originally addressed to me, I thought I just take a moment to put them back into context. When DREAMer originally asserted that Mormons believed that Lucifer and Jesus were "biological brothers", I replied: "Jesus and Satan do have the same father." Now, obviously Christians (and yes, that does include Mormons) believe Jesus is the son of God in a biological sense, but we are all children of God according to the Bible. That included the angels, devils, and humans. I was merely arguing that technically Satan and Jesus are brothers, because they were created by the same Father. This is in spite of the fact that Jesus has a far superior standing in the eyes of God. When DREAMer responded to my statement by saying that Mormons "believe that God had sex with his wife and gave birth to both Jesus and Satan, along with other children," he was just showing a fundamental lack of knowledge on Mormon dogma. The implication of that statement was that Mormons believed that there was some female goddess in addition to God. I don't claim to know everything about the Mormon religion, but I know enough to know that this is patently false. DREAMer made a direct statement about what the Mormons believe (i.e. God having sex and spawning children). I don't really see how Clutch's response was supposed to be out of context. Okay, I originally said, "And there is one good reason that they [Mormons] are [Christians]: they believe that Christ is their savior. Biblically speaking, that's all it takes" This generated the DREAMer response, "I can call my cats 'Christ' and create a religion to worship them. It doesn't mean I believe that the Jesus of the Bible is my savior nor that I'm a Christian. " Okay, obviously DREAMer is using a metaphor here. Unfortunately, by using his cat, it is a condescending metaphor, that basically says that the Mormon Christ is no more a God than his cat. It's quite obvious that Clutch understood his metaphor and was only turning it against him when he accused him of "such a narrow, closed-minded assumption that my Jesus Christ has suddenly become your cat." DREAMer, You've made some strong assertions about a religion that you have obviously been shown to not understand. Your arguments have been debunked using verses from your own Bible. Chalk this up as an educational experience and move on. ------------------
rimbaud, We do not run the same risk no. But, the truth is my involvement in CC.NET could more easily be taken away than Clutch's. How can you argue that? I find it interesting how some people have selective hearing, just as some people have selective reading. Did I NOT say, I've already agreed with Clutch's reasons, and even respect them. So, why keep harping on the same thing? If I agree twice will that make it better? The argument could have been argued without using a specific member name. Who knows a lurker could've registered just to argue this point. So, I don't see how someone who is not "Clutch" arguing against me could have much bearing on the long-term relationships needed to keep the site up. I'm not saying someone should have to hide who they are (sounds like "1984") just to be able to voice their opinions or concerns. But, if the risk is truly as great as I now see it to be, then what is the harm in finding a loop-hole? Besides, where are all the other Mormons who are not Clutch? If someone was questioning my religion, I would want to set things straight. -------------------------- Julie: The member who has yet to speak directly to me, but has found the time to 'persecute' me and even put me in her signature.
Clutch may be the only one. Who knows? The point is that you made false statements based on your lack of knowledge of the subject of Mormonism. You used that lack of knowledge in an attempt to place a particular religion in an unfavorable light. You can talk all you like about anything you like, but at least go in with the facts. Making an argument over the validity and characterization of an entire religion requires more than a some ancillary knowledge and a few blanket pronouncements. It requires real study and real understanding of which you have demonstrated neither. Maybe a better way of stating your belief that Mormons are not Christians would've been to say: "Mormons are not Christians by my definition and by the definition of those who have taught me on the subject." At least that would have been accurate. ------------------ Time for a new cause.
Rimbaud: Thanks for bringing that up? Wasn't it actually the Council of Nicea that organized the Biblical scriptures or was it the Council of Trent? I always get the two mixed up because one was where Martin Luther was excommunicated. Anyway, the Apocrypha was actually part of the original Bible. Protestants later had it thrown out after Martin Luther (a wise church historian but also an anti-semitic zealot) threw down the gauntlet against the Roman Catholic Church. He discovered the Bible verse, "By grace ye are saved through faith," which flew in the face of the Catholic practice of selling "indulgences" to family members of recently departed church goers. These indulgences would allow a family member still alive to buy their deceased brother, sister, or whatever out of purgatory and give them a ticket to heaven. The same group that came up with the idea of indulgences was responsible for the formation of the original Bible. Protestants simply fought against the church establishment and formed their own beliefs. After Luther made the first Bible translation into a "common language" - in this case, German - it opened up the reading of the book to people who were not educated formally. The printing press, not long after that, made it even more available. The Protestant version of the Bible became the norm after the Roman Empire came to a crashing halt and the British Empire began its reign. People like King James (yes, the same one) began doing new translations and giving their allegiance to the Protestant chuch essentially giving it more power. Of course, it became corrupted as well (according to those at the time) which led to the migration of Puritans and Pilgrims to the New World we now call the United States. If I have some of my history mixed around, someone please correct me. Time lines always screw me up. ------------------ Time for a new cause.
Okay, this discussion (not necessarily this thread) has just about run its course. By popular count, I've taken a beating at the hands of a more knowledgable opponent. I will admit that Clutch knows more about Mormonism and more about defending it, than I. This does not change my beliefs. It just means I ran into someone who knew more about a topic I was discussing. I may be discussing mathematics with someone and a professor of calculus may enter into the discussion. He or she may know more than I, but that does not automatically discount any and all that I have said on the subject. It, however, doesn't help me if the professor disagrees with me. So, this is more than likely my last post on the topic. I do not think you addressed this issue. Is it, or is it not, part of Mormonism that once a Mormon becomes a "god" that they will then "rule" over a planet of their own? I do not think most Biblical scholars believe that Revelation was not chronologically the "last" book written. A weak comparison at best. It is impossible (or at least makes no sense) for an entire Testament to fortell of the coming of Christ only to disallow that Saviour's teachings consideration as part of the Word of God. Nowhere in the New Testament is there a mention of a "Third Coming of Christ". The "Second Coming" is referred to many times. But, again three is not. But, if Jesus did, in fact, come to North America after his time on Earth in and around Jerusalem, then that would've been His "Second Coming" would it not? If you want to get technical and say that there is only mention that Christ will "come again", then I would have to argue that is does not say Christ will "come again and again and again...". Also, if Christ's reason for coming to Earth was to die and take the punishment of sin from all of mankind, then why would he have to make a second trip to go tell the Native Indians? Did he make another trip to Australia? Or New Zealand? Or the Philipines? Or numerous Pacific Islands? No. I said, "immensely long journey of enlightenment" because as I understand it there are hundreds maybe thousands of steps after death that a Mormon must go through to reach godhood. And, no one really knows the number of steps there are, except maybe the living prophets. This is the doctorine of Mormonism that perplexes me the most. John 10:30 "I (Jesus) and my Father are one." Isaiah 45:21-22 "...and there is no God else beside Me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside Me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else." 1 Timothy 1:17 "Now unto the King eteranl, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen." Am I "misinterpreting" something here? Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Genesis 2:7 "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." So, where does it say He created another god? He created something different than himself, MAN. Wow, leaving out verses 2 - 5 make a big difference to that statement doesn't it? God is "judging among the gods" (Lower-case, hence not truly God), gods that were created by man. The second part, verse 6, He is addressing two different audiences. 1.) Ye are gods (again lower-case) 2.) and, all of you are children of the most High. He's saying (to paraphrase) "To my left are gods, to my right are my children." And, if that translation is wrong, then the term used for "gods" has no positive connotation in the Bible, so why would anyone want to strive to become a "god"? "gods" are what God tells mankind to forsake for Him. Okay, maybe I wasn't as clear as I should've been. When I say "enlightening" I mean the steps a Mormons takes after death to become more god-like. From what I understand, minorities, "do" go through a "whitening" process after death on their path to godhood. If this updated version is still "totally untrue", please let me know. I did not say that Mormons believe all Mormons will go to Heaven. I said that Mormons believe that only Mormons will get into Heaven. I do not attach myself to any one church, but feel that each Protestant sect does not exclude another from Heaven. Nor, is it endoctrinated that Protestants believe that Catholics will not get in. Catholicism and Protestantism are just different styles to fit different people. But, Baptists, Episcopals, Lutherans, Catholics, all believe that Mormonism is not Christianity (I've talked to representatives/ministers of each sect). Now, are you going to say that Mormons believe that Catholics and Protestants can get into Heaven? What about if a Mormon decided that he'd rather be a Catholic or Baptist? Will he still get into Heaven? Maybe, "Heaven" is not the word I'm looking for. I obviously do not know all the terminology associated with the Mormon faith. But, I know you understand what I am saying, so please do not use equivocation to try and disprove or argue against what I've stated.
