I agree. I don't see anything in the context that would indicate that this was restricted to religions in his vicinity or religions that he was currently aware of. Why would God, supposedly, be so constrained in his thinking anyway?

The gentler interpretation that Simon prefers is a relatively recent development.

Is that kind of like the sweet old man down the street who just loves everyone and loves children, but turns out to be a child molester?

Sick and evil is still sick and evil, no matter how "righteous" one seems otherwise from their sick actions.
It's like the Joseph Smith / Jesus Christ DVD put out by Evangelicals. Ya, you could see and "feel" the love they had for Mormons, but their every word about our Faith and about us was a LIE, a perversion, and simply made me sick to my stomach.

Christian anti-mormons are no different than that wonderful old man down the street who turns out to be a child molester. It is the same kind of SICKNESS..... And their righteousness outside of those fruits DO NOT "justify" them, because it is simply so insidious.

Wow, so Sandra Tanner is sick and evil, like a child molester. What's with all the hate, Obiwan?

It makes God out to be an idiot, as though he might be thinking church X is OK, but since Joe did not attend one of their revivals or church X was in the next town over, he decided not to mention them.

I think Joe framed the question clearly enough. Which one out of all of the sects is correct? Surely God knew what he was asking.

Simon, what part of *all* don't you understand?

And what mormon has EVER said "all non-Mormons are corrupt"???
Thus you can't compare. You are misrepresenting Mormons trying to compare apples and oranges.
Further, the Tanners didn't simply say that, they bear false witness of mormonism, cherry picking things to make false claims of us. Hey, if people just said Mormons were corrupt, that's a statement of belief, and that's fine. Everyone has the right to their views. But, they don't have a moral right to be bigots, to bear false witness of others, etc.

Get the difference?

You would be wrong.



That's NOT "only" what they are doing. If they were that would be okay.



Again, that's NOT "only" what they are doing. If it was, that would be okay.
There is nothing inheriantly wrong with "comparative religion", for Mormons do it ourselves sometimes.
What is wrong, is to "falsely compare". That is what the Tanners do, and in fact ALL anti-mormons do. The rare honest critic however doesn't do this, thus we know it's possible to actually be an "honest" critic.



And such is a reasonable, fair, and valid action, which is why Mormons do it, and anti-mormons don't.



You're right, you didn't..... And that is the point. You presented additional views and ideas, which showed how another Faith simply didn't have the full truth or the correct truth. That is a perfectly reasonable action. Anti-mormons however, present a "distorted" mormonism, and then proceed to attack and degrade it.

Mormons have nothing wrong with competing ideas, and sides competing against each other. There is nothing "immoral" with that. What is immoral is what anti-mormons do, that is because of their hatred, they pervert and present a masterfully distored mormonism, that they they easily attack. That IS WRONG..... and that IS Immoral!

Joseph Smith said it of followers of all other religions. (He claims that is what God told him.)

I'm not an expert on the Tanners, but I haven't seen any evidence that they intentionally misrepresented anything. Of course, that doesn't rule out the possibility that they may have made some mistakes. But I don't have any evidence that they were lying or that they didn't have good intentions.

He did but never with much specificity. There didn't seem to be much malice beyond they are wrong, the preachers he had asked about were corrupt, and that the Christian creeds were an abomination.

I find that when I am in a social situation where there are Mormons and they start talking about their church, they ask me have I heard about the church I respond "been there, done that". This is followed by questions as to why I left. I respond because I felt the evidence against the Book of Abraham. Book of Mormon and the First Vision convinced me that the claims of the LDS church as the true church were not valid. I am happy where I am now, I maintain an interest in LDS matters, just as I do on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, C S Lewis, and other matters relating to the Bible. I can understand KG feelings. He was in the LDS church a long time, some of that as an apologist. I suppose he feels he wasted his time. I once saw a defination of angry as either fear, frustration or hurt. I think most exlds feel these emotions.

No he didn't.... He said the creeds and professors were corrupt, actually again God said this.
Further, that is a statement of belief. Wouldn't it be a correct statement if it was Christ speaking, and if the various religions out there were in fact "man-made", that men had took authority unto themselves that God never gave??? I don't know of any "revelation" that gave anti-mormons the right to attack other Faiths, especially specifically, do you???
I'll repeat again.... Do you understand the difference between bigotry and simply negative personal views of another thing?
LDS are perfectly happy if other Christians think our leaders are corrupt, or our creeds were an abomination. Sure, it's not a "friendly" statement, but it doesn't automatically make them a bigot, nor LDS bigots when we ever utter a negative word about other religions. What makes bigotry is other related ideology's and fruits.

You can't compare..... The anti-mormon attempt to pull any negative thing from 180 years of fully recorded LDS history as if that "proves" Mormons are just as bigoted toward Christians is simply LAME and FALSE. It's a perfect example of what anti-mormons do. They take a little truth and use it to tell great lies. For example, to every one negative statement about other faiths usually IN GENERAL not even specific like anti-mormonism does, there are 100's of positive statements about other Faiths and their people.

Are you really intellectually incapable of seeing the difference?
You're apparently a "dad of a mormon".... Ever asked your son if he notices a difference between how mormonism acts toward other faiths compared to how other faiths act toward mormonism? See, he's actually IN mormonism, so he likely will see it.

Further, I've actually been in your faiths, AND I've been in mormonism. Not only that, I've been an anti-mormon, and I've studied anti-mormonism and mormon scholarship for years. And guess what..... THERE IS NO COMPARISON..... I know you want to make yourself "feel good" in thinking Mormons are just as bigoted or anywhere close to that like other Christians are, but you are so very wrong.

If Mormons start attacking other religions, you would be able to notice the DIFFERENCE....

Get a clue.

So you agree with me (and disagree with Simon) that Joseph Smith did publicly criticize other faiths.

Obiwan,

Do you know what a "professor" is?

Do you?

I made an incorrect statement (first in my life, really :)). Please continue.

"Edited to not sound dumb"

Man, some of these apologists need to cool down. The rage they exhibit appears to be very unhealthy--always frothing at the mouth about some anti-Mormon, critic, or liberal Mormon.

And they say I have barely concealed rage.

At the very least we can say that yours is concealed. Their rage is free range.

Yes. And if Obiwan did, he would not have denied that JSJr called followers of other faiths corrupt while claiming professors were corrupt.

Duplicate

Which professors to you think God was referring to? All professors, of every religion and academic discipline? It seems pretty silly for God to speak in such encompassing terms to a farm boy who rarely left his immediate area.