LDS Criticizers

Sorry I didn't address it earlier, I finally got a moment to step back and look at the whole thread.

I think what happened in colonial expansionism is deplorable. I do think that it's worth mentioning though, that it wasn't missionaries who picked up arms in a genocidal rampage, rather the government, the military and those that supported them. I do live in the U.S. and feel this is a black mark in this nation's history that can never be erased. I'd even advocate a program to give it back. Build the cities on the non-furtile lands and leave the furtile lands to those who know how to take care of it, not the other way around.

In regards to the Christianity and the Bible, it is not contained in that book to murder inhabitants for their land, rather the very people who follow Christ are told to "love your neighbor" and "love your enemy". How anyone can love and kill, I'll never know. I know it's not something I can do. It seems there are a lot of misconceptions, so the best advice I can give is to check the Book and more importantly God Himself for answers. One who is familiar with the truth, knows that we as people are not to commit evil thoughts, let alone evil acts.

I'm open for any questions or discussion Chakotay, if I can be of any help.


[edit on 8-9-2005 by saint4God]

I criticize the LDS church because I use to be a member, and many of my questions left me with no logical answers.

Number one is that DNA testing shows no middle eastern DNA in any Native Americans? Here is a neutral link about it.

www.religioustolerance.org...

Also, can you explain the significance of the upside down pentagrams on the Nauvoo temple? If you're not familiar, there is a lovely picture in the July Ensign. Or you can see it here. Note also the sunstones, moonstones, and the all seeing eye on other temples on this same page.

cfac.byu.edu...


My final comment of the day is one that really bothers me. It is well know that LDS prophets proclaim to have the gift of tounges. It is also well known that the LDS faith "belive the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly". Pray tell, in 200 years, why hasn't at least one prophet taken the time to give the world the "perfect translation" of the Bible? I can't speak for everyone, but as for me, it would make me take a second look. The fencesitting on this just blows my mind. Why read from a book in church that might not be translated correctly? Wouldn't that be teaching false doctrine if you are knowingly quoting from a book that may not be translated correctly? I wrote to my bishop, stake counselor, and Salt Lake about this as well. It's time to step up to the plate, use the gifts that God has given them, and show the world the TRUE words of God. I'll continue to research and ask questions, but untill that happens, I'll continue to be critical of questions the church does not answer.

And I'm not talking about answers from FARMS or LDS apologists. I want answers that are backed up by the First Presidency. I find it odd how they are quiet on the official from on just about everything and leave it up to individual members to fight their battles.

Ack, I wish I'd looked at this post before I posted on my FAQ thread here: www.belowtopsecret.com... You asked the same questions there, thirddensity, and I answered them, but I didn't use 1st presidency sources, the sole reason being that I don't have any on those topics, else I certainly would have.

DNA issue: All I can say is the obvious: the 1st presidency supports the Book of Mormon as a true history of North America.

Nauvoo temple:
-upside down pentagram: according to the BYU article you linked to, it says that this was an ancient Christian symbol for the Star of Bethlehem:

Early Christian art often features the star of Bethlehem, the nativity star, or the star of the East, as an inverted pentagram, (Numbers 24:17, D&C 88:44, 2 Peter 1:16-19, Rev. 22:16 & 2:28).

The link also lists nonLDS uses of the inverted pentagram.

Bible translation: Again, as I posted on my FAQ, Joseph Smith did in fact re-translate the Bible. (called the Joseph Smith Translation, or JST) As I mentioned there, it seems very strongly implied that since we use the KJV Bible (JST) regularly in church, that Smith's translation is considered complete, so that the 'as far as it is translated correctly' criterion in the articles of faith is met fully. A complete translation has no need for anyone to alter it. I am not concerned about this; I would actually be much more concerned if a prophet were to suddenly translate more of the Bible today, because that would imply we had been using false/inomplete doctrine for a very long time. Though no explicit statements have been made (that I know of), I believe that the 'perfect translation', as you call it, is considered by the Mormon church to be the JST, again, as evidenced by the fact that we use it and quote from it regularly, including the 1st presidency in general conference. I can't see them quoting from a book they knew to contain errors.

The 'as far as it is translated correctly' caveat in the articles of faith refers to other versions of the Bible. Joseph Smith, through God's inspiration (if you believe him) selected the KJV as the Bible translation closest to perfect, and made the necessary corrections. For example, Mormons do not use any other Bible when they are quoting verses (NIV, modern KJV, etc) and I suspect that very very few Mormons have ever read any other version of the Bible, unless they were converts from a religion that did use a different one. I have a Gideon's Bible that I picked up somewhere that I occasionally use for comparison purposes, but I've never read it through.

Practically all religions suffer from a common ailment: the lack of evidence to support its claims. What makes Mormonism unique is not the lack of evidence in its favor, however, but the evidence that exists against it.

Someone has already mentioned the Joseph Smith forgery called the "Book of Abraham", and Saint4God has mentioned a few of the many contradictions between the Bible and Book of Mormon, so I won't recap those. Also, some have already pointed out that archaeological data completely conflicts with the claims made in the Book of Mormon, so I won't go there either.

Instead, as a student of Freemasonry, I'd like to bring up Smith's "divinely inspired" Temple ceremonial, which is actually nothing but a plagiarism of Masonic ritual.

Smith, before founding the Mormon Church, made a living variously as a cardshark and fortuneteller, witching out a few wells on the side. After founding the Mormon Church, he was able to land a full time job as king (he was crowned by church leaders). In Nauvoo, Illinois, he was initiated into Masonry irregularly, with a few thousand other Mormons, who received the three degrees over a period of two days. They were all eventually expelled for a combination of practicing polygamy and establishing a clandestine Masonic rite: the Mormon Temple Ceremony.

Only two months after becoming a Mason, Smith introduced the Mormon Temple ceremony. He claimed that the ceremony was given to him as a direct revelation from God, but it is painfully obvious that it came from Masonry. In fact, large portions of the ceremony were ripped off from the Masonic initiation ceremony verbatim.

Deborah Laake, a former Mormon, wrote a book called "Secret Ceremonies" concerning this. She had always believed that the Mormon Temple Ritual was divine and sacred, and would bring her closer to God when she was initiated into it. She was extremely disappointed, after the ceremony, to learn that the mysteries of the kingdom of God were "nothing more than fraternity rituals".

On top of that, she was rejected by her entire family when she finally realized that the church was nothing but a scam, and this has happened to seceding mormons again and again. When surrounded by Mormon missionaries, I suppose it's easy to get sucked in by their testabaloney, their "one true church" propaganda, and the promise to become a god or goddess after we die; hopefully, we'll all just use some common sense here, and treat it for what it is: a con man's masterpiece.

[edit on 9-9-2005 by Masonic Light]

ok apparently no one got the message i posted. what i was trying to say was that i think it's great you (lds criticizers) have an opinion about the religion and seem to see it for the fradulent org. it is. and for the followers of the lds church i will just say it...i'm sorry, it is a bogus religion and very much contradicts what the bible says and you are very decieved. we have till our last dying breath to make right with God (as the story of the two thieves states). i don't think i'm better than anyone just cus i believe in the HOLY BIBLE never said that i'm sorry that you didn't understand the truth i'm trying to tell you.