 |
Business Directory |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Classifieds |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| | Author | Messages | |
DaybyDay
Posts:314
 | | 08/05/2008 5:30 PM |
 Alert | when was this video made? Perhaps these were teachings taught at that time, but are now, not taught to congregants. | | | |
|
| | *rikimaru*
Posts:491
| | 08/05/2008 7:21 PM |
Alert | | no offense to anyone here whether they be LDS,christian or whatever, but does these tales from LDS lore sound any less um er farfetched than say scientology? | |
listened for, they cannot be heard;looked for, they cannot be seen; felt for, they cannot be touched: old ninja proverb | |
|
| | love@hm
Posts:523
| | 08/05/2008 8:48 PM |
Alert | I would have to say - the things portrayed in the video that we have disagreed with have never been taught - not at the beginning, not now.
Certain practices within the church are no longer practiced where once they were - but the teachings and core beliefs have not changed. | | | |
|
| | JAG
Posts:676
| | 08/05/2008 10:41 PM |
Alert | You want to see some really funny stuff, go check out Chick tracts. I really think a few of the reformers here see him as a prophet just like Luther. | | | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 6:25 AM |
Alert | Some observations on itsa's "true/false questionnaire" and the ensuing discussion:
1. 1. Am I right in thinking this is solely a phenomenon of evangelical Christians? I don't think anyone can find a single instance of something like this from Mormons directed towards non-Mormon Christian faiths. But it is a fairly common approach; there are at least two similar ones used on the internet (both of which contain many of the “questions” and talking points provided by itsa; see the question numbers that follow the links):
http://en.fairmormon.org/50_Answers
3, 4, 8, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 43
http://en.fairmormon.org/Questions_All_Mormons_Should_Ask_Themselves
4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 14, 52
2. The problem with itsa's list and how things are phrased is that many of the items are not accepted doctrine of the church, even though some may be believed by some individual Mormons (differently than in the garbled form presented in the questions). That is, even where you can tell where the question comes from or what it is originally based on, they would not be taught as worded in itsa’s list, and would be corrected by priesthood leaders (and women leaders in the third hour) if they were taught or commented on as worded in itsa’s list.
I know this because I am responsible for seeing that no false doctrine or unauthorized doctrine is taught in my ward (congregation) here in Maricopa. Many of the questions here have a foundation in beliefs that are or have been held by some Mormons, but have never been accepted, required doctrine in the Church. Such things may not be taught as doctrine, nor are Mormons or the Church responsible for them. Examples of these are anything pertaining to God’s life on an earth; while accepting the concept, there are no authoritative, binding doctrines on what that entailed, and nothing can authoritatively be said as Church doctrine about it.
3. This is illustrated by the fact that itsa’s continuing research to get to the bottom of the matter will turn up nothing resembling these questions from authoritative Mormon sources (i.e., Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, church manuals and handbooks). Anything outside of these sources, even books by Church leaders not published by the Church, Journal of Discourses (a mammoth 10,000 page 26 volume collection of talks from 1851 to 1886), etc. is not binding on the Church or a source of Church doctrine, although they are useful for the most part.
4. Itsa’s list of questions is also skewed because it is very disproportionate as a cross-section of thought and belief even among Mormons who may harbor some of them (such as a belief that blacks were “neutral” in pre-earth life, for example, or that Jesus was married). That is, the list of questions conveys the impression that its contents constitute the majority of thought and discussion for most Mormons. This is completely wrong. The lesson manuals, scriptures, and handbooks are public record (I have posted links to them many times before), and show the systematic topics and doctrines taught. Nothing on this list of questions can be derived from official Church sources.
5. As to the question of whether some of these things were once officially taught but have been disavowed and de-emphasized by the modern Church, I challenge anyone, using the resources of internet anti-Mormon ministries at your disposal, to produce evidence of such.
6. What we have seen here on this forum is exactly what evangelical Richard Mouw was referring to when he accompanied Ravi Zacharias to speak in the Mormon Tabernacle in November 2004. Mouw ruffled a lot of feathers when he said that
“we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you. We have told you what you believe without making a sincere effort first of all to ask you what you believe.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mouw | | | |
|
| | itsadryheat
Posts:239
| | 08/06/2008 8:34 AM |
Alert | The problem with itsa's list and how things are phrased is that many of the items are not accepted doctrine of the church, even though some may be believed by some individual Mormons (differently than in the garbled form presented in the questions).
Just so you know...I wrote the "phrases" exactly as they were stated in the video. I made them questions by adding question marks. Those phrases were word for word what was on the video as each point was being made. Except that the video did not ask them as questions. I simply added "True or False" and "...". Otherwise, I did not change the statements.
“we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you. We have told you what you believe without making a sincere effort first of all to ask you what you believe.”
I believe that many leading evangelical leaders think that he misspoke that statement. He did a disservice to the evangelical church by watering down God's Truth. God's truth is Truth 1) always and 2) whether you believe it or not. The bottom line is that the LDS church teaches and believes in things that are not Biblical. It has been said even on these forums that the LDS church does not believe the Bible to be the complete Word of God, that Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are different in LDS beliefs, you have a different understanding of salvation, of works, of heaven.... and so on...I have tried to bring the Biblical Jesus, Biblical way of salvation to these forums (and I do not apologize for that). We can take some of the more radical beliefs out of it (i.e celestial marriage, plural marriage, temple sealings...) the core of what LDS belief and the core of evangelical Christian belief is different. I have said it before, its like apples and a head of lettuce. Completely different.All I have asked you to do (and I speak for myself), when stating your LDS beliefs, is to use scripture to support it. I suppose you can find a grain to support what you believe, but when you compare scripture to other scripture, it just doesn't line up. Do I think I am bearing false witness against you? What I am trying to do is bear witness to God's Truth as in the Bible. I WILL apologize if I have sounded spiteful or vindictive. I am really not that kind of person and my Mormon neighbors would likely bare witness to that fact. I think that I have passion about God's Truth and I become passionate typing these things out...as you cannot see my facial expressions or body language or intonations http://www.religionnewsblog.com/9561/is-dr-richard-mouw-bearing-false-witness | | | |
|
|  | Bionicbunny
Posts:608
| | 08/06/2008 8:50 AM |
Alert | Is it possible that Joseph Smith attempted to answer questions that didn't need to be answered?
God inspired the Bible. In it is everything we need. We may have questions, we may wonder about certain things, but thats when our faith comes in. | | | |
|
| | itsadryheat
Posts:239
| | 08/06/2008 9:38 AM |
Alert | | Bionicbunny....good point. | | | |
|
| | JasonY
Posts:3311
| | 08/06/2008 10:20 AM |
Alert | | If it isn't a quote from Jesus in the Bible, don't worry about it.........Jesus said everything you need to know..... | |
"My favorite health club is the International House of Pancakes" -- Lewis Black | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 10:52 AM |
Alert | Posted By itsadryheat on 08/06/2008 8:34 AM Just so you know...I wrote the "phrases" exactly as they were stated in the video. I made them questions by adding question marks. Those phrases were word for word what was on the video as each point was being made. Except that the video did not ask them as questions. I simply added "True or False" and "...". Otherwise, I did not change the statements. That's what I thought. Thanks for clarifying. I believe that many leading evangelical leaders think that he misspoke that statement. He did a disservice to the evangelical church For sure. I'm sure that many thought he was "giving aid and comfort to the enemy." The thing I would like you to think about is the fact that Richard Mouw believes that Mormons are deceived and not salvation-bound unless we give up the Joseph Smith stuff. He has had a lot of explaining to do in evangelical circles since his November 2004 talk, and is on the record repeatedly that he is not saying that Mormons have a valid route to salvation. However, he stands behind his assertion that non-Mormon Christians are guilty of bearing false witness and should repent of this and stop doing it. So, it just might be possible for you to examine things and make course corrections where necessary without "crossing the line" and allowing Mormons "inside the tent." Saying that Mormon beliefs have been and are unfairly misrepresented doesn't mean you're converting or watering down Christianity, it's simply recognizing things as they are. Do I think I am bearing false witness against you? . . . I am really not that kind of person and my Mormon neighbors would likely bare witness to that fact. I think that I have passion about God's Truth and I become passionate typing these things out...as you cannot see my facial expressions or body language or intonations I don't think you would knowingly bear false witness; if anything, I think you are guilty of not having a "gesundes Verdacht" when it comes to anti-Mormon propaganda. My companion and I were stopped by the police in Hamburg Germany while proselyting and asked for our passports and ministers' licenses. Finding everything in order, they told us that the people in that neighborhood had "gesundes Verdacht" ("healthy suspicion" ) about people like us.  We all can use more "gesundes Verdacht" when it comes to this type of stuff. If Mormonism is fundamentally wrong, there should be no need to blatantly misrepresent or focus on out-of-context fringe stuff ("celestial sex," "God had sex with Mary," etc.), let alone flat-out deceive. I think you're a good person, itsa, and have no doubt that you are nice and would make a good neighbor. I also admire your zeal in witnessing to the truth as you see it. | | | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 10:56 AM |
Alert | Posted By Bionicbunny on 08/06/2008 8:50 AM
Is it possible that Joseph Smith attempted to answer questions that didn't need to be answered?
God inspired the Bible. In it is everything we need. We may have questions, we may wonder about certain things, but thats when our faith comes in.
| | | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 1:33 PM |
Alert | Okay, so here are my thoughts and observations to the list of 22 questions:
1) Does Mormonism teach that trillions of planets scattered throughout the cosmos were ruled by gods who were once human?
False, because this goes beyond what can be established with official doctrine (e.g., “who were once human;” we don't know what the eternal past entailed).
2) ...that an unidentified god & goddess wife had a spirit child named Elohim?
False, because this goes beyond what can be established with official doctrine (Elohim is a title, the plural of “God” [El] ).
3)...teach that Elohim was born to human parents, who gave him a physical body?
True in the sense that Elohim lived on an earth. As I have pointed out elsewhere in the Forum, Joseph Smith taught that Elohim had been a Savior, although even this is not official, accepted doctrine. We simply don’t know and don’t teach one position over another.
4)...through obedience to Mormon teaching, Elohim proved himself worthy and was thus elevated to godhood, as his father before him?
False, because this goes beyond what can be established with official doctrine. It also goes too far with loaded language (“obedience to Mormon teaching,” “proved himself worthy,” etc.). As stated, we don’t know the details of Elohim’s eternal past, and this statement would certainly be problematic under the view that Elohim was a Savior. We simply don’t have any authoritative doctrinal position.
5)...Elohim is Mormon's heavenly father who lived with many wives on a planet called Kolof (spelling)?
LOL! I think you meant “Jesus’ ” Heavenly Father. If you meant that Elohim is all of our Heavenly Father, then yes. It stands to reason that God has many wives, but we don’t know and have no official doctrinal declaration on this. For some reason, critics always get Kolob confused; it’s not a planet and is never described as being lived on. Kolob is the governing star nearest to where God dwells, according to the Book of Abraham. This meaning is a surprising bulls-eye hit given the meaning of the word “KLB,” but I’d have to look up the meaning.
6)...there was heavenly meeting convened to decide what to do with all of these spirit children. They decided to create Earth so spirit children could take on mortal bodies and learn good from evil?
This is essentially correct in its summary of the purposes for creating the earth (to allow us to obtain physical bodies and to learn to choose good over evil), though I would take exception with the implied indecision surrounding the pre-mortal council (“to decide what to do with all of these spirit children” ) . God having a bunch of children and then scrambling to figure out what to do with them, as the question implies, is not a Mormon belief. 
7)...Elohim's sons Lucifer and Jesus (making them brothers) were there. Lucifer wanted to be the savior and wanted to force everyone into godhood. Jesus wanted to give them a choice. Jesus's plan was accepted?
True. I never cease to be amazed with the overdramatic horror non-Mormons express at the thought that Satan is our (and Jesus’ ) brother, while they believe that God created Satan in His absolute foreknowledge and all-powerfulness out of nothing. How is having a son and a brother going very astray any worse than God creating the devil to be the devil? And isn’t that just a little bit better?
8)...Lucifer got mad; got 1/3 of the spirits to side with him and started a war. Lucifer was expelled becoming Satan; his followers= demons?
True, without objections.
9)...those who remained neutral during the battle were cursed with dark skin?
Emphatically false. This is one of the most problematic ones on the list. This has been believed by some Mormons as an explanation for the priesthood ban, it has never been authoritatively taught as doctrine. In fact, Church leaders over the decades have denounced this “neutrality” folklore (I have a copy of a letter from President David O. McKay from the 1950s correcting this, for example). Neutrality in pre-earth life is never used as an explanation in Journal of Discourses, although the priesthood ban is discussed. Above all, the neutrality explanation is contrary to Mormon scripture, where all of God’s children who “kept their first estate” (accepted Jesus’ plan) are allowed to come to earth. That is all that one can authoritatively say based on Mormon scripture.
10)...Elohim and one of his wives came to earth as Adam and Eve to start human race?
Check that. This one is even more false than the previous one. Critics point to a few statements by Brigham Young that, taken in isolation, seem to suggest this, but never deal with the hundreds of times that Brigham Young taught “orthodox” doctrine concerning the identities of the Father, the Son, and Adam. Some of which are in the very talks where critics mine the so-called “Adam-God” statements from. Brigham Young never developed what he was trying to say with these (although I have some ideas), and he’s no longer with us to clarify, but all one has to do is to consider the temple ceremony (whether one knows it legitimately or illicitly). Brigham Young is the one who was instrumental in transmitting the temple ceremony from Joseph Smith, and there’s not a whiff of “Adam-God” doctrine in the temple.
11)...years later, Elohim traveled to have sex with the virgin Mary in order to provide Jesus with a physical body? This one sounds vaguely familiar. Any questions about this one?
12)...Orson Pratt taught that Jesus had at least 3 wives (Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene) with whom he had children before crufixition.? True that Orson Pratt taught this; false that this is church doctrine. Many Mormons individually are of the opinion that Jesus was married, and some believe that He had children. Very few would agree that He was married to Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene. None of this is covered, one way or another, in church doctrine. One can believe what one wants with respect to this question and it wouldn’t affect one’s membership status or temple-worthiness.
I have to ask, though. Would Jesus being married somehow disqualify Him from being God or being able to atone for our sins? Would it have somehow made Him “unclean?” If so, where in the Bible does it discuss this?
13)... At resurrection, Jesus traveled to Americas to teach the Indians, who are Israelites? True.
14) in 421 AD, dark skinned Indian Israelites (Lamenites) destroyed the white skinned (Nephites) in battles? True as to the destruction of the Nephites by the Lamanites; I don’t think we can say with certainty that the Nephites and Lamanites had clear skin-color distinction at the time of the Nephites’ destruction. Discussion of the Lamanites being separted by skin color occurs early on in the Book of Mormon.
15)...Nephites records were recorded on gold plates adn buried by Moroni on Cumorah? True; “plates having the appearance of gold” is the phrase that’s used, and that’s important, because as critics point out, pure gold plates of the proportions described by witnesses who handled and saw them would have weighed around 200 pounds. The witnesses described them as weighing more like 60-75 pounds. Pure gold would have been too malleable to write a lasting record on; the characters would never have survived 2600 years scratched into soft gold.
The plates were probably made of tumbaga, a Mesoamerican metal product that retains the appearance of gold but retains the durability of copper.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumbaga
16)...1400 years after that, Joseph Smith found these plates? True.
17)...Smith had visions telling him to organize the Mormon church because all Christian creeds were an obination? True in the main. You can read his own words here (verse 19)
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1
He actually wasn’t commanded to organize the Church until 1830, ten years after his vision of the Father and the Son and seven to three years after receiving the plates (he had visits from angels for a period of four years). The translation and publication of the Book of Mormon and the restoration of the priesthood authority all transpired before God commanded him to organize the Church.
18)...Mormons are told to live by a strict financial and moral code, perform temple rituals for themselves and for the dead, with the hope of proving worthiness to become a god? True in the main; I’m sure that almost all Mormons would say that they live the gospel and keep the commandments because they want to return and live with Heavenly Father. While aware of the prospect of becoming a god at some time as a concept, the day-to-day motivation and focus is no different from any other Christian (i.e., doing what the Lord has asked us/commanded us to do out of love and obedience).
19)...Mormons believe they will stand before the judgement seat of Jesus, Joseph Smith, and Elohim? This one also sounds vaguely familiar! It would be incorrect to state that Mormons believe they will stand before the judgment seat of Joseph Smith. There are statements by Church leaders that emphasize that he, as a prophet in our time, will stand as a judge, but as I have pointed out, the New Testament places the apostles in a similar position, even going so far as to say that they will sit on thrones judging. The point is simply that we reject the Lord’s chosen servants at our own peril, and they and their words will stand as a witness at the last judgment.
20)...those Mormons who were sealed in eternal marriage cermonies believe they will become gods in a celestial kingdom of their own, rule other planets, and have spirit children of their own? This one is very problematic. Spirit children of their own, true. “A celestial kingdom of their own?” There is no scriptural or accepted authority for this; what is made clear is that we will always be under our Father and our God; we will never “usurp” or “surpass” Him. “Rule other planets?” Any statements or speculation along these lines exceed the limits of authorized doctrine.
21)...Mormons believe that Smith has done more than any other man, including Jesus? I already answered this; this one is not only false, but those who continue to perpetuate this do so knowingly. Mormon scripture makes it very clear that nobody, including Joseph Smith or any other prophet, has done as much as Jesus for our salvation.
22)...Smith died as a martyr, shed his blood, so that we (Mormons) can become gods too? Emphatically false. Those who originated this wanted to portray Mormons as attaching some sort of atoning power to Joseph Smith, something Mormons have never attached to him. There is not even a tenuous link in Mormon scripture or writings to some “connection” between Joseph Smith’s martyrdom and us “becoming gods too.” The only authoritative source, the same section of the Doctrine and Covenants in #21, states in connection with his death:
“Like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, [he] has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood . . . The testators are now dead, and their testament is in force [Joseph’s brother Hyrum was shot in the nose before Joseph was shot] . . . they were innocent of any crime, as they had often been proved before . . . and their innocent blood on the floor of Carthage Jail is a broad seal affixed to ‘Mormonism’ that cannot be rejected by any court on earth, and their innocent blood on the escutcheon of the State of Illinois, with the broken faith of the State as pledged by the governor, is a witness to the truth of the everlasting gospel that all the world cannot impeach . . . and their innocent blood with the innocent blood of all the martyrs under the altar that John saw [Revelation 6:9] will cry unto the Lord of Hosts . . .” (D&C 135:3, 5, 7). | | | |
|
| | EEE
Posts:374
| | 08/06/2008 1:59 PM |
Alert | @moinmoin 7)...Elohim's sons Lucifer and Jesus (making them brothers) were there. Lucifer wanted to be the savior and wanted to force everyone into godhood. Jesus wanted to give them a choice. Jesus's plan was accepted?
True. I never cease to be amazed with the overdramatic horror non-Mormons express at the thought that Satan is our (and Jesus’ ) brother, while they believe that God created Satan in His absolute foreknowledge and all-powerfulness out of nothing. How is having a son and a brother going very astray any worse than God creating the devil to be the devil? And isn’t that just a little bit better? 
I don't know why you say you're amazed. We believe Jesus to be the eternal God. The Alpha and Omega. The one who created all things, including Lucifer. So for Lucifer to be his brother means: 1)The Son of God wasn't always God(YHWH) 2) The Son of God had a beginning.(I know you might argue this because I think you said once, that all our spirits have no beginning) | |
Yeah, it's true- He allowed the fall of man/
But He used it now to exalt the Lamb/
The Lord, who's wise, permits existence of sin/
to be glorified in His forgiveness to men/ | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 2:03 PM |
Alert | | So is God the author and creator of evil? | | | |
|
| | EEE
Posts:374
| | 08/06/2008 2:11 PM |
Alert | Posted By moinmoin on 08/06/2008 2:03 PM
So is God the author and creator of evil?
God decreed evil to happen. To believe otherwise would limit God's Soverignty.
God is in control of all things including evil. There are a couple of examples in the bible how God used evil to accomplish his will. 1)Judas 2)Gen 50:20 "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive. 3)Of course the story of Job. God gave permission for Satan to murder his family. No evil happens outside of God's decree. So I ask you, is Evil outside of God's control? And a honest personal question, if you believe evil is outside of God's control, Do you constantly worry about evil things happening to you? | |
Yeah, it's true- He allowed the fall of man/
But He used it now to exalt the Lamb/
The Lord, who's wise, permits existence of sin/
to be glorified in His forgiveness to men/ | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 2:40 PM |
Alert | No, evil cannot thwart God's plans because of His omnipotence and omniscience. But, I believe in true free will (for example, I believe that you and I have chosen to be, respectively, Mormon and Calvinist. I do not believe that God predestined me to be Mormon and you to be Calvinist). This means that people make choices and these choices carry consequences, often involving other people (tyrants throughout history, for example). Sometimes God intervenes and smites people, but more often works within their agency to act and uses choices He knows they will make (and their consequences) for His purposes (like Pharoah in Egypt, or Judas. I do not believe that God made Judas betray Christ, but He knew Judas from his development in an eternal past, and knew what choices he would make in given circumstances.
I don't worry at all about evil things happening to me, and I don't believe that the righteous or the elect are always spared from tragedy. We pray for protection and preservation, but I hope I will have the integrity to accept whatever happens, even if I should be tried as Job. | | | |
|
| | RichTig
Posts:0
| | 08/06/2008 2:44 PM |
Alert | If god is all that and such and everything is preordained, then that woman who gets an abortion, got it because god planned her to. Can you please tell the 'faithful' to stop bombing abortion clinics? | | | |
|
| | EEE
Posts:374
| | 08/06/2008 2:49 PM |
Alert | Posted By moinmoin on 08/06/2008 2:40 PM
No, evil cannot thwart God's plans because of His omnipotence and omniscience. But, I believe in true free will (for example, I believe that you and I have chosen to be, respectively, Mormon and Calvinist. I do not believe that God predestined me to be Mormon and you to be Calvinist). This means that people make choices and these choices carry consequences, often involving other people (tyrants throughout history, for example). Sometimes God intervenes and smites people, but more often works within their agency to act and uses choices He knows they will make (and their consequences) for His purposes (like Pharoah in Egypt, or Judas. I do not believe that God made Judas betray Christ, but He knew Judas from his development in an eternal past, and knew what choices he would make in given circumstances. I understand your position, and I would agree most would side with you.
I don't worry at all about evil things happening to me, and I don't believe that the righteous or the elect are always spared from tragedy. We pray for protection and preservation, but I hope I will have the integrity to accept whatever happens, even if I should be tried as Job.
I don't believe that the elect are spared from tragedy. The point I was trying to make is, if you believed God is not in control to the evil things that do happen to you. | |
Yeah, it's true- He allowed the fall of man/
But He used it now to exalt the Lamb/
The Lord, who's wise, permits existence of sin/
to be glorified in His forgiveness to men/ | |
|
| | EEE
Posts:374
| | 08/06/2008 2:53 PM |
Alert | Posted By RichTig on 08/06/2008 2:44 PM If god is all that and such and everything is preordained, then that woman who gets an abortion, got it because god planned her to. It wasn't out of God's control. Perhaps, God used that to help mold that woman. Or many other reasons unkowingly to us. What the bible does say is, we are responsible for our sins, and we are without excuse. Can you please tell the 'faithful' to stop bombing abortion clinics? Just because they think they are the 'faithful' doesn't mean they are saved | |
Yeah, it's true- He allowed the fall of man/
But He used it now to exalt the Lamb/
The Lord, who's wise, permits existence of sin/
to be glorified in His forgiveness to men/ | |
|
| | moinmoin
Posts:506
| | 08/06/2008 2:59 PM |
Alert | I, personally, don't believe that every tragic illness or every tragic death is a "test" from God or meant to happen (although I think that this is sometimes the case). I think that part and parcel of our experience on this fallen earth are things like this.
I have experienced miraculuous healings within my family, which I am very grateful to God for, but I also realize that these are not an automatic given. If we instantly got everything we asked for from God, faith would have no role.
That's just a personal view. I know many Mormons who would disagree with this and say that all suffering and tragedy are part of God's larger purpose. | | | |
|
| |
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.6 |
|
|
|