I was wondering about a parallel thread, "The Conversion of LDS into Republicans using Flawed History".

You'd have to convince me first that there is such a thing as Nephites.



Myth is a genre of book in the Bible. Meaning, stories that convey truth but aren't to be taken literally. The five books of the Pentateuch are myth. It's only Mormons, Evangelicals and some atheists that insist these books are literal histories.

I've never heard the Book of Mormon described as anything by Joseph Smith, it's author (translator if you must in order maintain a semblance of dialogue), as history. I've never seen the LDS church teach that the Book of Mormon books are not to be taken literally.



Mormons are the only people who I know of that think God is going to show up when you pray about a book. I have never met a Catholic or mainline Protestant who has prayed, asking if the Bible is true. Catholics, in particular, are not sola scripture.

I think you are painting evangelicals with a very broad brush relative to these books. I think you might be surprised at the viewpoint of many who worship under the evangelical umbrella.

Well, that is where we differ. I don't believe in a God that doesn't show up at all and that you can't see or talk to. And I also didn't say Mormons were praying over a book. A book is just a thing and doesn't matter. Your relationship with God is what matters. The book is just an instrument to get you to seek and speak with and follow God. That's the point of the scriptures after all.

You are right Tobin! Albion is hypocritically clinging to the Bible now even though he rejects every quote I give him from it due to his brainwashing!!!

gdemetz, you really are something. I do not reject the Bible verses you quote, only your misinterpretation of them...an interpretation designed to prop up the false premises established by Joseph Smith. Swallow the big lie and its easier to swallow all the little ones that follow.

You absolutely are rejecting them, Albion! When you tell me something like "You are gods" does not mean "You are gods," then you are rejecting what the Bible is plainly and clearly stating, and if you can't see it now due to spiritual blindness (which appears to be contagious here), then you will clearly see it in the day of judgement!!!

gdemetz, does God have wings? The scriptures make allusion to that all the time. It's got to be so, right? Jacob blessed his son Judah: "You are a lion's cub." Gen., 49:9 It says right there he is a lion's cub...got to be, right? Of course not...he was no more the cub of a lion than the Judges of Israel were really gods....their role/office gave them position and power over the people like "gods"...they were stand-in for god if you will. Aren't you tired of continually raising this issue. Please don't throw the rattle out of the pram again.

That has got to be one of the dumbest arguments that I have ever heard!!! Christ also quoted that scripture, remember?! The NT also clearly states that we can become partakers of the DIVINE nature! It also states that we can, being immortal in the resurrection, even become joint heirs with Christ, and even sit on Gods throne, just as Christ did!! Do you think that is just a courtesy seating?!? Wake up Albion! You are way over your head on this site! Please don't give me any more of your dumb evangelical twistings of the scriptures! Every verse I quote to you, you try to say that it doesn't mean what it says! Why don't you just rewrite the whole Bible and call it the Perverted Evangelical Version!!!

Of course it is a "dumb" argument, gedemetz, but no less so than the one you employ by ignoring Biblical history and context and extrapolating a presumed support for Smith's falsehoods. I will not comment on this particular topic any longer since I am wasting my breath but it you want to continually throw it up, have at it.

It's dumb clearly because if it is stating that they were acting like gods, then why does it say in the same sentence that they are the children of the Most High?!? You see, you do need my braille version after all!!!

Mormonism's falsity is almost painfully obvious once its history and truth claims are examined critically. It's too new and too well documented. The BofM and BofA crumble under scrutiny.

Traditional Christianity fares only slightly better because of its relative age and the obscurity of its origins. If the technology and knowledge that we have today had existed in the second century, Christianity would have been just as easily dismissed back then as Mormonism is now.

It is only "dismissed" for the same reason that Christ was "dismissed" by the unbelieving Jews who crucified Him! It they could have gotten their secular heads out of their secular (deleted) and looked deeper into his teachings, miracles, and how His life fulfilled so many prophesies written centuries before His time, and some of which He had no control over (such as what happened to the thirty pieces of silver), then they would have begun to see and learn, but they were too evil, stubborn, hard hearted, and spiritually blind! It's the same with those types today! Despite the miracle of the Book of Mormon with all the witnesses and testimonies, etc., as well as how the restored church fulfills so many Biblical prophecies, the blind will not see!!!

gdemetz I'm new here and have no history with you, but let me point out that every sentence in the above post ends with at least one exclamation mark. I will humbly submit that, as a general rule, an inverse relationship exists between your persuasiveness and the number of exclamation points you employ.

Hello gdemetz,

The above post is very antisimetic and untrue with regards to the Jews. The Jews didn't crucify Jesus, the Romans did.

Most Christians I know of, take "Word of God", quite literally when discussing the Bible. Particularly for Christians, the Word is Jesus Christ, so the Gospel narratives have a high importance. God acts in and through humans, human acts portrayed in the Bible aren't necessarily the Word or work of God. This doesn't make the Bible corrupt, it makes it more credible. If God only acted outside of our existence, what would be the point? That is where I see Mormonism failing. Sometimes God is around, sometimes God is not....like some sort of shadow that can only be seen in the right circumstances.

No one said a person can't talk to God, or receive guidance from God. That is a Mormon teaching about other religions. Just one of their many errors (lies, really).

I agree there is a level of faith, but faith does not preclude reason. They exist together. I don't see this coexistence in the context of Mormonism. The Book of Mormon also doesn't "fit" into Christianity, which could be whole thread to itself. The reasoning that Mormons use to justify it, if taken seriously, don't align to Christian teaching or belief, or even to the context of the Bible. As an example, the "other stick" they use as scriptural evidence for the Book of Mormon, isn't talking about the Book of Mormon at all.

Sleepyhead, it was the Jews who were behind the crucifixion of Christ. Pilate did not want to crucify him, but washed his hands of the matter, and left it up to the Jews who gave the verdict.

So if I have a holy book that says LDS perform sex orgies in the temple you wouldn't see a problem with me promoting that viewpoint since the book would be part of my scripture?

Hello,

Just a further note here. According to the gospels, the saducees (those are the ones that didn't believe in angels or the afterlife) wanted Jesus killed because they were afraid he was going to lead the people in a revolt. The torture that is in there is all the idea of the Romans.

Sleepyhead, I will not comment on your next to last post, it seems trivial to me. However, I know of no specific scripture that points to the Saduccees specifically as the ones responsible for wanting Christ crucified, although there were many Saducees in the San Hedron who could have also gone along with the high priest and others who wanted him crucified.