Posts by Cold Steel

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

Qcmbr: did you get a chance to read the article?

Yeah, it was a hoot! I haven’t read that stuff for a long time. Of course what makes it so amusing is that it’s all based on early anti-Mormon literature that has only been taken seriously by other anti-Mormons. Take the “Moroni And the Monkey Story” cited in the article. Why do these stories only pop up in the scandalous stories of the day? Why doesn’t Orson or Parley Pratt ever recite these ridiculous stories? Why doesn’t Brigham Young, Orson Hyde, Heber C. Kimball ever tell them? Why don’t the people who knew him best and then turned against him and conspired to murder him tell them?

I’ll be totally honest with you. The only time I suffered a crisis of faith is when that Salamander Letter came out years ago. I was in a state of shock for days. But I finally made a leap of faith and put it behind me. And when it was later discovered to be a hoax and a forgery, it taught me a great lesson: don’t give up the things you know for things you don’t know! I also recall all the bitter, disillusioned American Indian members who left the church over the DNA issue. Then when that issue turned out to work in our favor, it was too late for most of them. Had I left the church over the Salamander hoax, it would have been a wasted, life-changing event. I thank God I didn’t bail out over something that stupid, but that’s where my spiritual testimony kicked in.

Having said that, I continue to wonder whether you’re reading my posts, Qcmbr. This whole argument centering on the Comoros islands is silly considering the other aspects I brought up. Even if there were cities called “Nephi” and “Lehi” and “Alma” — it would make absolutely no difference. Why? Because no one in 1830 could have written the Book of Mormon. The evidences are so overwhelming that one has to close their eyes, put their fingers in their ears and stomp to miss them.

Oh, and speaking of Alma, even a simple name turns out to favor Joseph Smith and turn the table on his critics. For years, the church has had to battle the “experts” who maintained that Alma was a woman’s Latin name, not a Hebrew or Jewish name. In the past several decades, however, Alma was discovered on a Jewish document found in Israel dating to the early second century A.D. The name has since been shown to be even older, being attested on clay tablets found at the northwestern Syrian site of Ebla and dating to the second half of the third millennium B.C. Not only that, but the significance of the name has been documented:

Now this is a comparatively small thing, but for years it was something that was consistently thrown at us by our enemies. But even that has shown Joseph Smith to be right on target. If he were a fraud, wouldn’t new discoveries have a tendency to refute his work? Instead, they consistently sustain it. So when we have people chuck old and discredited anti-Mormon books and authors at us, of course we can’t take them seriously.

Discovering the evidences requires reading. If you read the articles I've referenced in my past several posts and you really want to know whether the Book of Mormon is true, you can get some powerful empiric evidence that it is. You also can read the Book of Mormon itself and ask God (see James 1:5; Moroni 10:4-5) and gain a spiritual testimony.

The prophet Moroni (not to be confused with the capital of the Comoros islands ) wrote:

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost, ye may know the truth of all things.
Book of Mormon Names Attested in Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions
Further Evidence for Book of Mormon Names
Evidences of the Book of Mormon
Evidences of the Book of Mormon by Dan Peterson
Poppers: I've talked to Mormon missionaries about shunning and got them to admit that it does happen, although they said that it isn't part of their doctrine and it shouldn't be happening.
Well, yes, that’s what I’ve been saying. People are people and as long as bruised feelings exist on this earth, people will shun other people. The important thing is that the church doesn’t advocate it. It’s an anti-Christian practice that cannot in any way be done in love. Where did Jesus or the apostles ever shun anyone, particularly sinners? If we shunned people for leaving the church, I wouldn’t be chatting with Qcmbr. I’d love to see him reconsider his views and come back, but realistically it most likely won’t happen (barring heavenly intervention), but shunning people like him and others I know, and shunning people who have committed gross sins and whatever else the Jehovah's Witnesses shun for, simply isn’t productive and actually quells the Spirit.
Qcmbr: "My only local LDS friend...the same one she was told by her bishop last year she needed to be careful who she was friends with as it could affect her temple recommend.”
Seeing this is hearsay, I can’t comment on it other to say that it’s not the way of the church. Anyone who is truly interested in this topic should read Spencer W. Kimball’s Miracle of Forgiveness. The 13th president of the LDS church, Kimball spells out how we, as Christians, cannot expect the mercy and forgiveness of God unless and until we can mete it out to our fellow man.

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

Well, I told you you're beyond truth and reason. Everyone else I know has moved on to much better things. If you can dismiss what I've told you, then by all means I'm sure your own choice of paths will serve you well.

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

A lot of people were superstitious. Joseph Smith was superstitious. People are products of their environment and they don't achieve perfection or infallibility when they are called to be apostles or prophets. The apostle Paul carried with him his attitudes about women. While Jesus was very open to them, Paul never quite rid himself of his strict Jewish roots. But is a superstitious person necessarily more subject to suggestion than everyone else? How about the apostles? They all came from diverse backgrounds without the benefit of education. Do you really think none of them was superstitious? When Jesus appeared on the water, didn't Peter at first think it was a spirit?

Martin Harris was a wealthy, self-made man and he wasn't known as being an idiot. And the man saw an angel, heard the voice of God, saw the plates and other artifacts and saw the angel turn the pages of the plates. Had Joseph attempted to deceive him, he would have remembered the warnings his wife had given and most likely retreated with his money. When confronted by armed men who threatened to shoot him if he didn't recant his testimony, he opened his vest and invited them to shoot.

Believe what you wish, my friend, but very few of the early LDS leaders led peaceful, happy lives. They were imprisoned, mobbed, run out of their homes and forced to leave their property to those who ran them off. Some had their children shot in front of them, or, in at least one case, saw their children's heads bashed in. (They boasted that it saved ammunition.) The only thing that would have motivated me to stay with such a movement is that if I knew it was true. And, finally, keep in mind that Martin spent his entire wealth financing the church's interest, including publishing the Book of Mormon, which often was given away or sold well below cost.

Oh, and two others saw the angel, plates, heard the voice of God and so forth. None ever denied their testimonies, when doing so would have made them local heroes. I have some more detailed info I can send you on that if you PM me. Also, check out the following:

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

Qcmbr, I suspect there won’t be much to debate, as religion doesn’t offer absolute truths. I’m not sure what you have in mind when you state that I am “willfully disregarding very basic and clear cut failure points that preclude Mormonism being other than a pious fraud.” If there were such clear cut failure points, don’t you think someone would have published them by now? I also think I’d be aware of them, having made these things a matter of some study.

First, how many people would be interested in such an exchange? Second, what would be the parameters? Are we talking about the validity of the Book of Mormon, the reliability of the witnesses, the historical aspects? Geography? Or are we going to be talking moon men and Quakers? Give me a rough idea of what the discussion would revolve around, and how do we justify such a discussion on a Jehovah’s Witnesses forum.

...you completely miss the concept that the entire book betrays its construction by the constant, incorrect usage of old English forms—absolutely out of place in a translation—rendering entire sentences as contextual gibberish (a thread a while back jgnat posted an excellent deconstruction of the BoM from a linguistic POV.)

Then he certainly knew that the Book of Mormon text was strung out as one long line, just what one would expect if transcribing the translation of an ancient text. Besides, I’m unwilling to discuss the ins and outs of translations. For example, critics complain that the term “Jesus Christ” was used in the translation. After all, both “Jesus” and “Christ” are both Greek terms. If you try to hold Joseph Smith to modern translation processes, I can’t argue that. But as Dr. Hugh Nibley notes: “A translation, according to Willamowitz’s classic definition, is ‘a statement in the translator’s own words of what he thinks the author had in mind.’”

Nibley also states: “There is no such thing as a text that can be read but not translated; whoever can read a foreign language so that it means something to him can certainly express that meaning in his own words—and such an expression is no more nor less than a translation. If one cannot express it in one’s own words, one has not understood it.”

LDS scholar Dr. John Tvedtnes writes:

Jewish scholar Theodor H. Gaster intermingled KJV language and modern English in his Dead Sea Scriptures. When citing passages from the Dead Sea Scrolls that were also found in the Bible, he employed the older style of English. When Robert Lisle Lindsey began to work on the Gospel of Mark while living in Israel, he initially translated it “into simple modern Hebrew from the Greek text. The text was then distributed to Hebrew-speaking readers and comments invited.” Many of those who reviewed the work expressed “the desire that the Gospels, as ancient works, should be read in Old Testament Hebrew style.” Lindsey returned to the task and prepared a translation of Mark in biblical Hebrew that has received wide acclaim.

It is possible that the Book of Mormon would have met with the same fate as Lindsey’s modern Hebrew version of Mark had Joseph Smith rendered it in nineteenth-century English. It would not have sounded scriptural to Americans and Englishmen familiar with the King James Bible. Another reason for using the KJV verbiage in the Book of Mormon is that it makes it easier for the reader to recognize when biblical books are being quoted by the Nephite prophets. In that respect, the language of the Book of Mormon fills the same role as Charles’s translation of apocryphal and pseudepigraphic texts.

See Isaiah in the Bible and the Book of Mormon and Literary Style Used in Book of Mormon Insured Accurate Translation.

You cannot stand in judgment of those who post here, many of whom have escaped through great sacrifice, mental pain and cost a destructive cult when you yourself are part of a very elaborate, and effective cult that has robbed its people of 10% income per annum and is guilty of racism, sexism, torture, homophobia, murder, polygamy, polyandry, fraud, theft, secret practices and unfulfilled promises.

I am not your judge, Qcmbr. And if you think I’m going to get in a long, drawn out discussion of your emotional problems with the church, it’s not going to happen. Your bitterness cannot be contained and you clearly have issues. You have made your judgment of the church, and each one of your charges above represents a gross distortion of facts.

Homophobia? Why, because we don’t seal homosexuals in our temples or marry them in civil ceremonies? Tithing? Like the LDS church is the only church on the planet that teaches it? Yet you call it robbery? Actually, this is what God calls those who withhold tithing: “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house....” (Mal. 3:8-10) Look, if you want to discuss various aspects of our scriptures or doctrines, fine, but I suspect you’re cruising in charted waters. All of your criticisms have been addressed long ago.

Over the course of my life in the church, I’ve been privileged to have met some of the church’s top historians and professors of ancient scripture. I’ve taken courses from, and have known, Cleon Skousen, Richard Anderson, Truman Madsen, Hugh Nibley, Wilford Griggs, Rodney Turner, Donl Peterson, Hyrum Andrus and many others. I’ve seen, heard and read things that lead to the unmistakable conclusion that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is exactly what it purports to be (and this based only on evidence). The evidence is there for anyone who wants to dig around for it, but the real way to know is to obtain a spiritual witness of the work, and I have a strong spiritual testimony, independent of all else, that the work is true. The cognitive dissonance aspect works both ways, and were I to reject what I know, my mind would explode. It would be more productive to try to convince me that the earth was flat!

Well, what kind of evidence am I talking about? Not only the Book of Mormon’s geographical consistency with Old World deserts and byways from Jerusalem along the Frankincense Trail through the empty quarter and all the way to Bountiful, but non-Mormon sources, such as Father George McRae, onetime head of the Harvard Divinity School, who spoke on aspects of the LDS temple endowment—all the while not having any idea he was doing it! One of the most impressive evidences (and I’m tempted to use the word “proofs”) is Dr. Hugh Nibley’s DVD lecture series on the Pearl of Great Price. Of course, someone who didn’t know the church doctrines and ordinances could watch the series and not see anything in it at all. Like the proverbial pearl of great price, someone not knowing its value would esteem it of no value whatsoever, and that’s the way it was intended.

Again, I don’t stand in judgment of anyone who leaves the church, but I do find that you are far more judgmental of the Latter-day Saints than I am of people who have left.

Nugget: it isn't a matter of whose made up scriptures are better than others. There is no divinity here in either religion just control of the flock. As human beings we have the ability to think and reason to do the right thing not because of a religious rule but because we can empathise with others.

I don't see that at all. What do our general authorities gain from controlling anyone? Was this Jesus' game as well?

We can also see the injustice and stress caused by religion that fears knowledge and free thought. It is not necessary for every one to think the same way to be good people. It does not follow that because you leave bad religion you automatically become filled with bitterness and hate. On the contrary you suddenly realise how much goodness there actually is in the world around you.

I concur. But some people who leave DO become filled with bitterness and hate. They feel deceived, abused, taken. And if I felt that way, I'd probably be bitter as well. But in all my years with the LDS church I have NEVER felt like I couldn't think or reason as I chose. This book I'm reading about a guy who leaves the Jehovah's Witnesses says, in the novel, that he feels like he's fishing in a pond with no fish. I've never felt like that. After more than 30 years in the LDS church, I still feel I'm learning things that are new and fresh. The JWs keep repeating the same old things in their meetings. Yet if they're happy, I'd rather have them stay in that religion than to leave and be unhappy. I don't get the feeling that most ex-JWs feel that way.

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

Problemaddict: Cool steel, what you may be interested to know is I recently met a person touting the second book of mormon. He translated it in the 90's using the seer stones on loan to him from one of your Quorum of 12, and apparently has the gift.

Yes, it should be interesting to compare this guy’s translation with the one Joseph Smith produced. I heard of this guy some time ago and he’s completely rewritten his book several times. He says he used to be a security guard at the church office building in SLC.

BTW, it’s not a “second” Book of Mormon. When Joseph Smith got the plates, two-thirds of them were sealed (see Isaiah 29). They won’t be translated until the Millennium.

One of the verities of the LDS church is that only one man on Earth holds the keys of authority at a time. When Joseph received those keys, he said they had been restored for the last time. Just a few months before his death, he convened a meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve, and addressed them for three hours, during which he conferred the keys upon them. He then said, “I have sealed upon your heads all the keys of the kingdom of God. I have sealed upon you every key, power, [and] principle that the God of heaven has revealed to me. Now, no matter where I may go or what I may do, the kingdom rests upon you. But, ye apostles of the Lamb of God, my brethren, upon your shoulders this kingdom rests; now you have got to round up your shoulders and bear off the kingdom. If you do not do it you will be damned.”

One reason we have those keys, as did the apostle Peter, is because whenever something comes from the Lord, it will come through a divine chain of command. The Governing Body of the Jehovah's Witnesses believe they are that chain, but then, they never received any authority from anyone. They assumed it.

My point is that the sealed plates will come forth in due time, and when it does, it will come through that chain of command—not some canned security guard. And BTW, I’m reading the original Book of Mormon on my Android, the one with no changes made to it; and I can only occasionally tell the difference. No doctrinal changes, only grammatical corrections and, once or twice, words added for clarification. Those who claim all these changes were made and that they somehow queer the Book of Mormon, just haven’t researched it. And the original Book of Mormon version can be found at all LDS bookstores and some folks actually prefer it because it doesn’t have all those chapters and verses.

See: The Original Book of Mormon Transcript; Isaiah in the Bible and the Book of Mormon; Translation of the Book of Mormon

Since his story mimics that of Joseph Smith’s, I am sure it will be easy to join this new group and move forward with them on their quest for truth!

Yep...just don’t drink the Kool-Aid!

I will say, the Mormons believing that they have a current prophet who is in direct contact with God as the need may be, is certainly "owning" their changes. With all of the Book of Mormon revisions for example, you can just say hey......God wanted those out....he told our prophet and they confirmed with the bishops and the Quorum of 12 agreed and now we are good to go!

Nope. I don’t think the Lord was consulted. As an editor by profession, I think the revisions were called for. For example, the phrase, “...this people is grass” is completely correct in Hebrew, but bad grammar in English. So changing it to “this people are grass” isn’t something that would be appropriate to take before the Lord.

GaryNeal: All About Mormons “Dum, dum, dum, dum, dum.” Sorry, but if this is even remotely accurate, it would be tough sledding indeed to get most outsiders to believe it.

That’s okay...it’s not even remotely accurate. Most cartoons aren’t. Just as an aside, the simpleton Martin Harris (or so he was depicted in the cartoon), wasn’t such a simpleton after all. Yes, his wife told him he was being deceived and bitched at him constantly. Harris believed Smith, however, and later was one of three men who were permitted to see the plates, hear God’s voice declaring they were true and seeing the angel, the sword of Laban, and the interpreters (seer stones). Harris also NEVER recanted his story, and though he later left the church over a personal grievance, he stayed true to his story and told it each time as though it were the first. One wonders, if I were dependent on a man and his money, and his wife told him I was a crook, would I then admit I was a crook and attempt to get him to go along with my story? Dum, dum, dum. Each of those three witnesses, incidentally, were well respected and known for their integrity and honesty. Eight more men, also of honest reputation, saw the plates by themselves, with no angel, no voice. And none of those eight EVER recanted their testimonies. Those were details completely left out of the cartoon.

SD7: ...yeah, I'm absolutely angry about having decades of my life stolen from me by a cult. I should be, anyone who was in that situation should be. There are days when the anger is too much to handle and it messes things up at home with the Mrs. But I'm not so much angry at the people as the fact that a handful of people are responsible for this much evil and no one can touch them. People going along with that is just too much to bear.

Your story is much like others I’ve heard on this board, and anyone who’s been flimflammed out of great deals of money or years of their lives are bound to feel searing anger and even a need for revenge. But doing that is like hitting the tar baby. You can’t hurt them; in fact, with every swing there are those you left behind who think you strike for your own damnation. To quote the crazy Captain Ahab in Moby Dick: “Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering [beast]; to the last I grapple with thee; from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee!”

Melville knew a great deal about resentment and loathing. (Also from Moby Dick: “All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil....”

Perhaps they should be called “Moby Halls” instead of Kingdom Halls.

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

Laika: Also, doesn’t it bother you that the Mormon website whitewashes Joseph’s history by making out he was a faithful and devoted husband of only one wife?

...you didn't really answer my question...whether or not it bothers you that the Mormon website's biography implies he only had one.

Hi, Laika. Didn’t mean to avoid the question. Actually, I must have missed that implication. If an LDS author or website would make such, I would be critical, but I don’t think it would bother me. We certainly don’t deny the doctrine, and it was a tough one to obey, but we have so many writers and variances of interests that it’s tough to ensure total consistency. If you can cut and paste the part you’re talking about, it will be easier for me to address the point.

Oculos Aperire: Everyone of those Mormons in that vid look like they all have beautiful homes and tons of money... How do they all get so rich??

I wish I knew, OA. I really wish I knew.

Prologos: ...doctrines just as nuts as WT BtS.

I don’t doubt you see it that way. Every doctrine in every religion seems nuts to others.

Return of Parakeet: It’s not helpful or correct to paint all ex-dub atheists with the same brush, as much as you would like to squirrel them all into your convenient little categories. People are just a bit more complicated than that.

Of course they are, but most of our disagreements on this forum stem from the fact that you don’t carefully read what I’m saying. I said: “Some who fall away from the JWs become atheists....”

An excellent book to read about the history of the LDS and the horrifying FLDS sects it spawned is “Under the Banner of Heaven” by Jon Krakauer....

Yeah...take a look at Doing Violence to Journalistic Integrity, a review of Krakauer’s book. A much better book is Prophet’s Prey, by Sam Brower, with a preface by Jon Krakauer. It's the result of seven years of research and is a much better book.

DeWandelaar: Also... like all cults: let them prove they are the persons assigned by God...unlike Jesus and Moses they have no miracles to back them up....

We don’t? Tell me, have you ever even cracked a book (other than an anti-Mormon book) that was written about the LDS church? We don’t have any miracles except for the healing of the sick, the appearance of angels, the casting out of devils, the raising of the dead, deliverance from our enemies, prophecies, speaking in tongues (not the gibberish of today’s Pentecostal sects), visions and, well, other than those, I’m stumped. As for cults, Pliny the elder referred to Christianity as “that wretched cult,” so even there we’re not too different.

Of course, neither Jews nor Christians can “prove” their miracles, though they were witnessed by the people of the times of Moses and Jesus. In like manner, we LDS can’t prove our miracles, either. But we have plenty of witnesses who testified of them, and still testify of them. And there’s not a single miracle in the ancient church that hasn’t also been done in this dispensation in the modern church.

MrFreeze: I know of a couple Mormons that were excommunicated and their Mormon family stopped speaking to them.
Problemaddict: ...while the shunning program Mormons engage in is not as rigid, or as communal, it does exist.

The difference is, the church doesn’t practice shunning, neither does it endorse or recommend it. Ritualistic shunning is wrong, whoever does it, and it goes counter to the gospel of Christ. It’s hard to show love to someone you’re emotionally stoning, isn’t it? Jesus didn’t practice it, and the ancient church didn’t practice it. It actually was popular in the various Baptist sects of the 1800s through probably the early 1960s. They’ve pretty much abandoned it now and even joke about it. The Jehovah's Witnesses are the only folks I know who still do it as official doctrine.

LisaRose: Your attempts to say that Mormons are different and better than the JWs is hilarious. Same meat, different gravy.

I never said we were “better,” but now that you mention it, our meat is organic and freshly ground, and the gravy is freshly made, not canned.

Nugget: ... examine your own belief system with an open mind before trying to win converts here.

Win converts? Moi? Look, I didn’t start this topic. For most of my time on this crazy board, I kept my religion secret. Then people started comparing it to the Jehovah's Witnesses, and I came out of the proverbial closet. And, btw, what makes you think I haven’t examined my own belief system? I became a convert to the church in 1971 when I was 18 years old, and I’ve never regretted it. Now I have people who haven’t read squat about “Mormonism” (except for some incendiary websites on the Internet). So you better watch it, or else I’ll take my converts and make my own forum!

I would never think of becoming a Mormon and certainly have no intention of being controlled by another group of men on a power trip they validate with their own brand of made up scripture.

Ah, well, our loss. I reckon it’s a matter of whose “made up” scriptures are better than other made up scriptures.

Problemaddict: Where you guys I think jump them in wackiness, is the idea that you can become a divine being (God), over your own universe at the higher echelons of heaven. As God is man can become.....I believe is the GBHS phrase of note.

This is actually one of the toughest issues people have with the LDS church, but it shouldn’t be in my view. The Eastern Orthodox have believed in a large part of the doctrine, which is called theosis or deification. In essence, it states that we, as the children of God, who are made in his image, after his likeness, male and female, can become like him. John teaches that because of the atonement of Christ, we all can be made perfect, inheriting all that the Father has. Jesus sits on the right hand of the Father, and those who gain eternal life, as co-inheritors, sit down with him.

But then what? We just sit around and glow with the whiteness of the sun? Forever? And what of those resurrected to lower glories? Paul stated there are varying degrees of glory in the resurrection. He states that there are many different types of flesh on Earth, and that there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. There is one glory of the sun, another of the moon and another of stars, and each one varies in glory. Then he states: “...so also is the resurrection of the dead.”

I don’t have room or time to go further, but one of the main doctrinal differences we have with the Jehovah's Witnesses is that we believe that the earth will become a glorious sphere like the sun, not just a garden. The garden will happen during the Millennium, but after that, Earth will undergo its own “resurrection” to a much higher glory. And it will be the home of those who gain eternal life. Whether people will get their own planet or universe is a speculative matter and no one knows what types of dominions we will oversee and what, exactly, we’ll do. But we will have an eternal progression in which that we will become one with God.

For more, check out The Doctrine of Theosis, or Becoming a God.

12

Scriptural list of gods anger?

by iCeltic in

can anyone point me in the right direction, a good descriptive list of gods anger, genocide, vengeance and general things that we would view as bad and the scriptures next to it to show where these things are in the bible?.

Cold Steel

Madgiant, many of the examples you display are not God killing people, but people killing people. David, for example, killed the messenger (an Amalekite), not for delivering a message, but for killing King Saul. We don't know all the facts, but what we do know is that 1) God didn't have anything to do with it; 2) the Amalekite slew Saul, who was anointed King over Israel by a prophet of God; his life was thus sacrosanct; and 3) he sought to gain favor by bringing David the crown and bracelet. In fact, he slew Saul because, he said, “I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them hither unto my lord. ” He may have been telling the truth, but you don’t kill a king who has been anointed of God, and you certainly don’t kill a king to curry the favor of his successor. In Robert Graves’ I Claudius, the chief praetorian, Macro, smothers Tiberius as a favor to Caligula and presents him with the imperial ring. And Caligula is grateful; however, as soon as he had consolidated his power, he had Macro killed, because he realized that anyone who would kill one emperor would certainly kill another, if the occasion warranted it. And it just so happened that Macro’s successor was the one who organized the plot to kill Caligula, and was on of the first to plunge his sword into the reprobate.

David’s murder of Uriah wasn’t mentioned in the list, most probably because it was a sin David was condemned for by the Lord. In like manner, many of the other things you list are not of God (such as the killings of the circumcised, the killings committed by Samson, and even the killing of Goliath) and the ones that were done by God were done for good and just reasons.

So for those who buy the Which, for example, do you think was an undeserved killing, or killings, by God? And in which was God completely out of line? Are there any justifiable reasons the Lord can take life or is the taking of all life by Deity a travesty? At what point did God lose the right to judge his creations. If he gave us life and taught us the ways of righteousness, does he not retain the power and right to judge us according to the laws he has given us?

These lists are essentially meaningless.

..........

Elijah calls down fire on his sacrifice in front
of the 600 heathen priests he later caused
to be slain.

12

Scriptural list of gods anger?

by iCeltic in

can anyone point me in the right direction, a good descriptive list of gods anger, genocide, vengeance and general things that we would view as bad and the scriptures next to it to show where these things are in the bible?.

Cold Steel

Don't confuse the Jehovah’s Witnesses with the Old and New Testaments.

God did not indiscriminately murder any people, nor did he commit genocide or other atrocities. In the case of Moses, the people of Canaan were warned not to interfere with the Israelites as they moved through their lands. The Canaanites disregarded those warnings and attempted to undermine their religion and to destroy them as a people. Keep in mind, too, that these weren’t just “other” civilizations. They were degenerate, despicable cults that sacrificed their own children to heathen gods and engaged in profligate sexual practices that were interwoven with their religion. In the case of the prophet Balaam, who fell and was later put to death by Moses, he knew that if the daughters of the heathen seduced the young princes of Israel, that the Israelites would lose the protection of Yahweh.

There has never been a culture or people who were destroyed by the Lord who weren’t first warned by prophets. In the cases of repentance, many were spared. But when they became so wicked that succeeding generations had zero chance of attaining righteousness, they were usually destroyed. But keep in mind that God did not annihilate such people. As one theologian put it, they were moved en mass to a penalty box. They did not go to a burning hell, but a “prison” (see 1 Peter 3:18-20), with the wicked who came before, to await the visitation of Jesus.

The Jehovah's Witnesses believe the myth of Armageddon, where one day the skies will get dark and then all hell will break loose. While they watch, millions will be massacred by Yahweh (everyone but them). While it’s true that many of the most wicked will perish with the Second Coming of Christ—again, they’ve been warned—many billions of people will be spared. The first part of the Millennium, in fact, will be spent with a great deal of missionary work being done. And if a person doesn’t believe in God, but is a good, decent, honorable person, they will be spared. Even one-sixth of the vast army of the Beast will be spared, according to scripture. (Ezekiel 39:2) And, by the way, Armageddon will be fought in the Middle East, and the Jehovah's Witnesses will have nothing to do with it.

8

WOW!! I thought JW's were uninformed about world events, but nooo.

by jam in

breaking amish tv show.

two young amish adults was.

ask, who was martin l. king.

Cold Steel

Nope. Not a JW phenomenon at all. Jesse Waters, who works for Bill O'Reilly (Fox News), routinely interviews people in New York, Los Angeles, Oahu, and other major cities, and most people in these places are dumber than bricks. They don't know who the vice president is, they don't know about the IRS scandal, Benghazi...you name it. And they let these idiots vote.

I was speaking with a chaplain from Georgetown University earlier this week, and he said when he asks people on campus about why they voted for Obama, a hundred percent of them replied it was because of what they were getting from government. Not one, he said, mentioned ideology. Back in the 60s and early 70s, Americans who left the Communist Party, USA, said they were told to deny any affiliation with the party and to infiltrate schools, unions, civics organizations and other political parties. Their goals were to centralize power, divide the population, debauch the currency, redistribute the wealth and disarm the people. People back then knew how to recognize people who did these things; however, education has eliminated this knowledge. In short, our immune system was compromised. Now when we see people doing these things, we don't register anything. We've got a president who was born from parents who were communists, nurtured by communists, mentored by communists and backed by communists (as was Al Gore). Yet no one but radical right wing extremists are stupid enough to believe things might not be as we're told.

So, no. It's not a JW thing at all.

73

Bitter apostates

by Laika in

witnesses often go on about apostates being spiteful and bitter.

when you get cut off, shunned, or threatened with shunning just for the audacity of thinking differently, it's not surprising that getting angry at the witnesses is the reaction - it's like a self fulfilling prophecy.. but also, i recently posted an email from a 'friend' on this board who told me that everyone he'd spoken to about me said i had changed, become like another person.

it didn't occur to him that the day before i told my parents i'd quit the religion just 3 weeks ago, i met him for lunch, we had a good time and he didn't know anything was up.

Cold Steel

I'm reading the book, Farewell to Jehovah's Witnesses, by John Rippon. I'm convinced that some of the things that keep the Witnesses in tend to turn, over time, into the things that drive them away. The ritualistic shunning of family members and friends, the constant bombardment of the same things over and over, the relentless expectation of Armageddon and the forced separation from the world; these all create a steady pressure that, over time, starts creating cracks in their own foundation. To some degree this is offset by the granting of recognition and power; however, there is a great deal of mind control at work that I don't see in any other Christian religion.

Some who fall away from the JWs become atheists and reject all religion, having been burned. That also is part of the mind control process, though they don't realize it, because the scriptures they once knew (and misinterpreted) become hateful to them. I also think the translation of the scritpures they use is so pedestrian and esoteric that it goes out with the bathwater.