Mormons

Originally posted by Regret
Rofl. If the Bible is true, then why have Christians changed it?

TRUE the bible has been changed by many people, who will all get thier punishment. But to blatantly add a false prophet who has nothing whatsoever to do with the events is not only pathetic and so clearly false its amazing that people actually follow it.

Anyone who reads about Jesus, and his words of wisdom KNOWS he is the truth. All other prophets, people and cult leaders (yep mormoms are just a cult) don´t matter, he is the saviour and any other deviation is just misleading people.

Im not called rofl by the way, dunno why you keep writing that.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
TRUE the bible has been changed by many people, who will all get thier punishment. But to blatantly add a false prophet who has nothing whatsoever to do with the events is not only pathetic and so clearly false its amazing that people actually follow it.

Anyone who reads about Jesus, and his words of wisdom KNOWS he is the truth. All other prophets, people and cult leaders (yep mormoms are just a cult) don´t matter, he is the saviour and any other deviation is just misleading people.

Im not called rofl by the way, dunno why you keep writing that.

Lol, and you follow the traditions of those that have changed the Bible. You follow the words of philosophers and scholars, not the words of the Bible. You have added the words of men to your understanding of the Bible. Faith without works, a concept that did not exist pre Martin Luther. Pre-existence was taught until ~250 A.D. Trinitarian dogma and ex-nihilo creation did not exist until the Council at Necaea. Where in the Bible does it anywhere state that there should be no temples. Can you adequately explain 1 Cor. 15:29? No.

The Bible testifies that God speaks to men, it does not testify that God ever stopped, nor that he ever will stop, speaking to men.

False prophets claim that God has stopped speaking to men.

Originally posted by Devil King
Anyone who rolls their eyes at the christian bible, but upholds teh Book of mormon, needs to examine their subjective purpose.

what is that, like a Roman telling the Greek his reliion is "silly".

Both sides of the argument need to wake the **** up. You're all delusional.

Mmmmmm...this koolaid is GRRRRRREAT!.

Originally posted by Regret

So? There are three differing accounts of the crucifixion in the Bible. The same logic thus refutes its validity, if such logic is accepted. Do you have issues with the Masons?

The Apostles passed down the story orally for AT LEAST 60 years, most likely the Apostles did'nt write the Good News themselves. Joseph Smith saw this appearance (like 10 years before) HIMSELF and STILL could not get the fact straight. There is a major diffference.

Originally posted by Regret
If alteration to the text of the Book of Mormon is a valid rationale for the LDS Church being false, then any other Bible based religion is also false

We have a winner, sort of.

Originally posted by Devil King
There are many christians, muslims and Jews that have abandoned those aspects of their faiths that allow for this type of blind hatred, as they have done over the centuries with a number of their outdated religous beliefs.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
The Apostles passed down the story orally for AT LEAST 60 years, most likely the Apostles did'nt write the Good News themselves. Joseph Smith saw this appearance (like 10 years before) HIMSELF and STILL could not get the fact straight. There is a major diffference.

Originally posted by Regret
Lol, the accounts of JS first vision do not conflict. Do some research on the subject from some pro-LDS sites as well, you are only looking at detractors statements and interpretations.

Now you're just in denial. Jopseph Smiths wrote 3 different accounts HIMSELF, maybe you should read up on it. Youre the one who is following him. Know your prophet, obviously you don't.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Now you're just in denial. Jopseph Smiths wrote 3 different accounts HIMSELF, maybe you should read up on it. Youre the one who is following him. Know your prophet, obviously you don't.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What did Joseph Smiths do?

Create one of the largest cult groups in the world.

Joseph Smith, Bringham Young, Kimball, Hinkely etc are not even in the same league as Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, Nehemiah, Samuel, Isaiah, Esther, Gideon, Job, Yoshua (Joshua),Ezekiel, David, Daniel

Originally posted by the Darkone
Create one of the largest cult groups in the world.

Joseph Smith, Bringham Young, Kimball, Hinkely etc are not even in the same league as Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, Nehemiah, Samuel, Isaiah, Esther, Gideon, Job, Yoshua (Joshua),Ezekiel, David, Daniel

Here's a good informational site on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (The Mormons)

Introduction to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Originally posted by Regret
Here's a good informational site on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (The Mormons)

Introduction to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Propaganda.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Propaganda.

What isn't propaganda when you're talking about either religion or politics? Everyone is either pro or con. At the very least you can look at both sides of an issue before you make a judgment.

Originally posted by docb77
What isn't propaganda when you're talking about either religion or politics? Everyone is either pro or con. At the very least you can look at both sides of an issue before you make a judgment.

Thanks for agreeing with me, propaganda.

Holy wow, Regret is doing a great job defending Morminism!

On the "cult" idea.

How is every religion not a "cult"

Do you know the definitions of "cult"? Any orginization can be called a "cult". People think that calling Mormans a "cult" is insulting but it just shows their ignorance of the word.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Thanks for agreeing with me, propaganda.

We still didn't exactly mean the same thing. Propaganda is simply media created with the purpose of persuading to a certain point of view. That doesn't mean that there can't be truth in it, only that if you want the whole story you have to go beyond reading from one source. In this case the whole article is fairly factual, but since it is written from one point of view, it could be considered propaganda. That does no lessen its value or reliability.

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Propaganda.

"Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist." Source: Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell, Propaganda And Persuasion, 4th edition, 2006.

Show me one singular non-propagandist type article or statement on the LDS church's beliefs and doctrines from another religion, or secular source. I doubt you can, a supposed objective view is impossible since in religion the objective view is another position that requires defense. There is no such thing as objectivity in religion, period.

Also, propaganda, as docb points out is not defined by fiction and untruth. Propaganda is defined by intent and agenda.

Originally posted by docb77
We still didn't exactly mean the same thing. Propaganda is simply media created with the purpose of persuading to a certain point of view. That doesn't mean that there can't be truth in it, only that if you want the whole story you have to go beyond reading from one source. In this case the whole article is fairly factual, but since it is written from one point of view, it could be considered propaganda. That does no lessen its value or reliability.

Originally posted by Regret
Yes, agreed, propaganda. I hope it persuades large numbers of people, I doubt that it is objective or impartial. Any statement that is intended to debate or argue a position is by definition propaganda. Your statement on this forum that that site is propaganda is propaganda. Movie trailers are propaganda aimed at shifting the purchasing power of the public to go to that movie, propaganda.

Yes, I said Propaganda, which you two agreed with. Now it was your choice to take that claim the way you did. So again, that shit is propaganda... anything else you want to point out?

"Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape, manipulate perceptions, cognitions..."

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Yes, I said Propaganda, which you two agreed with. Now it was your choice to take that claim the way you did. So again, that shit is propaganda... anything else you want to point out?

"Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape, [B]manipulate perceptions, cognitions..." [/B]

Just that what you yourself are saying in this forum is [gasp] propaganda. guess we should just ignore it then, right?

Originally posted by 2D_MASTER
Yes, I said Propaganda, which you two agreed with. Now it was your choice to take that claim the way you did. So again, that shit is propaganda... anything else you want to point out?

"Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape, [B]manipulate perceptions, cognitions..." [/B]

Manipulate

[list=1][*]To move, arrange, operate, or control by the hands or by mechanical means, especially in a skillful manner: She manipulated the lights to get just the effect she wanted.
[*]To influence or manage shrewdly or deviously: He manipulated public opinion in his favor.
[*]To tamper with or falsify for personal gain: tried to manipulate stock prices.
[*]Medicine To handle and move in an examination or for therapeutic purposes: manipulate a joint; manipulate the position of a fetus during delivery. [/list]