Announcement

Collapse

LDS - Mormonism Guidelines

Theists only.

Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin


Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Since MAN can become God, why not women?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    You're about as good an "apologist" as I am a ballerina.
    I'm sure you could do as well at ballet as a 320-lb football player.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
    SEX

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill the Cat
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    You are going beyond what Brigham said.
    No I am not. He plainly stated it. It's YOU who has to spin and twist to make it into something besides the plain meaning of what Brigham said.

    You have said that the creation of SPIRITUAL beings is a result of PHYSICAL action. That is not what Brigham Young said.
    It's exactly what he said. He said ALL procreation happens the same way in every reality.

    I am not throwing Brigham under the bus. I am throwing your rampant assumptions under the bus.
    You grabbed Brigham's beard and suspenders and chunked him like a pumpkin.

    There exist fixed laws and regulations by which the elements are fashioned to fulfill their destiny in all the varied kingdoms and orders of creation, and this process of creation is from everlasting to everlasting. - Brigham Young
    That's clarified by his statement: "[God] created man, as we create our children".

    No Bill, it does not mean that.
    Bologna. How do we create our children? Through sexual intercourse and gestation.

    It means that there are laws of existence that have always been there and always will be.
    And that they are the same laws that govern how we create our own children.

    There exist principles from eternity to eternity. For you to jump to the conclusions and interpret Brigham's words beyond to mean something beyond what he actually said is all to frequent with your posts on this forum.
    Oh come off it! I showed you the context of what he was teaching on, and it is YOU who has had to spin it into something he didn't mean. That's par for the course with you, your posts here, and your stupid video series.

    Footnote 9: President Brigham Young, General Conference address, 8 October 1876, location not specified. Brigham Young claimed that “God . . . had children upon the same principle that children are now begotten” (Scott G. Kenney, ed., Wilford Woodruff’s Journal: 1833–1898 Typescript [Midvale, UT: Signature Books, 1984]

    And what PRINCIPLE would that be Bill?
    SEX

    According to you, the principle is "physical sexual intercourse".
    And unless you have a direct quote from this discourse refuting it, then the context stands.

    You are a fool.
    And you are a desperate loser who needs the real Jesus.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill the Cat
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    I respect you KD. You are the only one on this forum who even attempts to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.

    The others here are all just pretenders.
    I'll take that as a complement, since you lack the Holy Spirit, and therefore don't know of the things of God.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness'... male and female God created them." (Gen 1)
    And the verb (make) conjugation is singular, showing that elohim is not, in fact, plural but the intensive singular. It is equivalent to the "royal we" - which is readily apparent with even the most elementary understanding of how Hebrew works.

    Mormon teachings regarding the creation of Adam, if they have been accurately cited, are directly contradictory of the Genesis account of his creation. In truth, I do have reservations about whether the Genesis account is factual, but the Mormon account doesn't in any way act to address the difficulties with Genesis ... it simply adds a different kind of difficulty.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kind Debater
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Then, perhaps you could stop ignoring KD's thread here!
    Since CP brought it up...it would be nice, 7up, if you responded to this post.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kind Debater
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    I will check my PM soon.
    So I sent 7up a PM, which he failed to notice due to the screwiness of the notification system. Realizing this, I posted about it on this thread, and then when he didn't read that post (until yesterday), I posted about it on the ex nihilo thread, and then he finally read it. And then he reads the post on this thread, and... (7up, next time I feel the need to inform you that your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries, I'll just do it in a post. )

    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Then, perhaps you could stop ignoring KD's thread here!
    And now CP has me confused with Digital Inkling.

    Gosh, a gal could start to feel almost invisible, you know...

    (BTW, I'm not mad at all at either of you, I just thought it was funny to see two communication failures on the same page. )
    Last edited by Kind Debater; 07-08-2014, 10:59 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    I will check my PM soon.

    I respect you KD. You are the only one on this forum who even attempts to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
    Then, perhaps you could stop ignoring KD's thread here!

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    Pointing out that you do not live the teachings of Christ, (obviously mocking the sacred beliefs of others is an example), is not a personal attack.
    Would you mind showing me where the Bible prohibits me from opposing the false teachings of a cult?

    Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    Pointing out that you do not live the teachings of Christ, (obviously mocking the sacred beliefs of others is an example), is not a personal attack.

    You and the others on this thread claim to follow Jesus, but you clearly do not.

    -7up
    WAAAANNNNNNnnnnnnhhhhhhhh, Seven is MOCKING Me!!!!!! WAAAAaaanannnnhhhhhhh




    Seriously, Seven, I see nothing wrong with standing up to your false prophet and your phony BoM.... and just because you think yours is a "sacred belief" does not make Smith any less a con man, or make the BoM "real".

    I follow Jesus -- just not the one your false prophet invented.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    7up: So, you did not mock what they (Orthodox Jews) held sacred?
    Nope. They do subscribe to a totally made up book and follow a false prophet. And they answer to God, not me.

    How unlike you.
    Are you 12?

    They reject Jesus as Lord and Savior. Isn't that a false teaching?

    -7up
    God has a plan for them.

    Leave a comment:


  • seven7up
    replied
    7up: So, you did not mock what they (Orthodox Jews) held sacred? How unlike you.

    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    I oppose false teachings, and false prophets. ...

    They reject Jesus as Lord and Savior. Isn't that a false teaching?

    -7up

    Leave a comment:


  • seven7up
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    And, once again, lacking anything of substance, you go to personal attacks. Quite childish.
    Pointing out that you do not live the teachings of Christ, (obviously mocking the sacred beliefs of others is an example), is not a personal attack.

    You and the others on this thread claim to follow Jesus, but you clearly do not.

    -7up

    Leave a comment:


  • seven7up
    replied
    Originally posted by Kind Debater View Post
    I foresee a thread on hell in the future, only I don't have time for it right now.



    Arguably there are cases where sin is big enough that its presence in a person's life would indicate that person doesn't truly regard God as their God, e.g. someone continuing in adultery with an "I don't care if it's wrong, it makes me happy" attitude. But what is it about rejecting LDS-specific teachings that constitutes a big enough sin to merit hell, despite trusting in Jesus? I guess I'm talking about essential vs. non-essential doctrine here. E.g. my pastor said recently that someone can disbelieve that the stories in the OT are literally true yet still be saved -- he explained why disbelieving them would be a bad idea and have negative ramifications, but he didn't regard that as something that would throw one's salvation into question. What LDS doctrines are so essential that denying them means one isn't saved?

    BTW, I sent you a PM. Just checking if you saw it since I think email/popup notifications are off by default.

    I will check my PM soon.

    I respect you KD. You are the only one on this forum who even attempts to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.

    The others here are all just pretenders.

    As for your question, I cannot say what are "essential doctrines" and what are not. I would simply say that if the Holy Spirit has testified to an individual that the Restored church is truth, then it is a sin to reject the truth that was revealed by the Holy Spirit.

    -7up

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    That just brings up another out of context quote that proves how much of a liar you are. Figures since you are serving the father of lies. Especially, since I already debunked it on this forum.

    -7up
    I think you're competing for "nuttiest Mormon we've ever had on Tweb". And really exposing all those "Mormons are wonderful kind loving people" stereotypes.

    Leave a comment:

widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Working...
X