Polygamy & Judging Righteously

[Aaron32]

Charles Manson claimed to be Christ.
Was HIS view "valid"?

The FLDS believe Warren Jeffs is a "prophet".
Is THEIR view "valid"?

First let me clarify that "valid" is different from "true". Within a persons own frame of reference, a belief can be "valid". Proving something objectively true requires objective evidence.
Since religion is faith based, and personal, objectively proving something true is difficult.

Having said that, I don't know their teachings of Charles Manson, or Warren Jeffs, well enough to know how they reached validity in their beliefs. I do know they clearly fell into a ditch, though, true to principle Jesus taught.

The Flat-Earthers believe the Earth is flat.
Is THEIR view "valid"?

It might be valid to them, but scientifically we can prove it false.

We can recognize that certain claims are false, even though there are people who believe them.

Agreed.

 

[Theo1689]

First let me clarify that "valid" is different from "true".

Exactly.
And the examples I gave were neither true, nor valid.
Just as your theology is neither true, nor valid.

Within a persons own frame of reference, a belief can be "valid". Proving something objectively true requires objective evidence.
Since religion is faith based, and personal, objectively proving something true is difficult.

Oh really?
So you're saying the Bible is merely a figment of my imagination?

It might be valid to them, but scientifically we can prove it false.

Just as it is trivial to prove Mormonism false.

 

[Aaron32]

I do trust in the LORD, which is why I know Smith was a fraud and false prophet because of the bad fruit he bore, that Jesus our Lord warned us about--false prophesies, hypocrisy, marrying multiple woman, 1 or 2 as young as 14, and even other men's wives! I also know he was a false prophet because he taught contrary to Scripture. God's word exhorts us to "test the spirits" and we do that as the Bereans did--using the actual word of God to do so.

Smith bore very bad fruit. He taught lies as doctrines. Who is the father of lies, Aaron?

Ok. I realize I didn't give a complete response to this, so I'll go into more detail.

Let's take a look at your analysis:

I know Smith was a fraud and false prophet because of the bad fruit he bore, that Jesus our Lord warned us about--false prophesies, hypocrisy, marrying multiple woman, 1 or 2 as young as 14, and even other men's wives!

false prophesies - can we be more specific? He was right on one prophecy of having his name know for good or evil.
hypocrisy - this is also broad - can you give an example?
polygamy - Abraham and David were polygamists. I don't think that is a fair criteria.
as young as 14 -I only know of Helen Mar Kimball. In her later years, she defended it, not resented it.
Other men's wives - Yeah, I don't know Joseph Smith's mindset on this, given it goes contrary to the directions in Section 132. If it was a mistake, that doesn't make everything else he said prior to that false. King David was chosen, even though he committed adultry and caused the death of Uriah.

I also know he was a false prophet because he taught contrary to Scripture. God's word exhorts us to "test the spirits" and we do that as the Bereans did--using the actual word of God to do so.

You have no authority to interpret scripture. Scripture and be interpreted multiple ways. I've tried to have a strictly Biblical conversation to defend Mormonism, and nobody on the other side seems to want to have that conversation, or atleast follow through with it.
Btw, Bereans agree with me regarding the doctine of the Trinity - one of the reasons Mormons aren't considered "Christian".

Smith bore very bad fruit. He taught lies as doctrines. Who is the father of lies, Aaron?

As I've demonstrated. Your "bad fruit" is currently subjective. Therefore, "lies" has yet to be proven. But let's continue and see where this goes.

 

[Aaron32]

God didn't tell me that, and God didn't tell Joseph that, either.

Can you prove that?

God has already told us which church to join.
The message is in the BIBLE.

So when different sects are contradicting each other, all basing their arguments on the Bible, that doesn't really help much.

And you need to trust God's word, the Bible, instead of trusting those who tell you to doubt God's word, the Bible, like Joseph Smith did.

Where does the Bible say trust the Bible alone? It doesn't. God's word is more than just the Bible.

 

[Theo1689]

false prophesies - can we be more specific? He was right on one prophecy of having his name know for good or evil

So he got ONE prophecy right (and a self-fulfilling prophecy at that), and that makes him a "prophet"? I don't think so. If I tell you that tomorrow I'm going to have dinner, and then tomorrow I have dinner, does that make me a "prophet"?

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

If you get only ONE "prophecy" wrong, that makes you a FALSE prophet.

polygamy - Abraham and David were polygamists. I don't think that is a fair criteria.

Neither Abraham nor David claimed polygamy was from God, and supposed to be practiced. So it's apples and oranges.

You have no authority to interpret scripture.

<Chuckle>
You should tell that to Jesus, and to Paul, who taught us to study the Scriptures.
That's pretty pointless if we can't interpret it.

And where does the BIBLE teach that one needs "authority" to interpret Scripture?
Your claim is silly on its face.

Scripture and be interpreted multiple ways.

Yes, because many people ignore context.
Mormons are a great example of this.

You also misinterpret Scripture because you project outside doctrines into it.
You also misinterpret Scripture because you have author "Scriptures".

Btw, Bereans agree with me regarding the doctine of the Trinity - one of the reasons Mormons aren't considered "Christian".

What are you talking about?

 

[Aaron32]

How can we "respect" evil?

I'm not saying "respect evil". To clarify, a person can still respect others, even when others believe differently than themselves. (That's the golden rule Jesus taught.)

 

[Theo1689]

Can you prove that?

Prove that God DID speak to Joseph.
I've got time... I'll wait...

So when different sects are contradicting each other, all basing their arguments on the Bible, that doesn't really help much.

Stop trying to change the subject.
This is the forum for discussing MORMONISM.

I suppose if you want to go along your path, we could discuss all the MORMON sects which contradict each other...

Where does the Bible say trust the Bible alone? It doesn't. God's word is more than just the Bible.

2 Tim. 3:16.
But even if there is more than "God's word", Mormonism still contradicts the Bible.

 

[Theo1689]

I'm not saying "respect evil". To clarify, a person can still respect others, even when others believe differently than themselves. (That's the golden rule Jesus taught.)

You said respect others' beliefs.
Now you're changing it to respect others.
Make up your mind, okay?

And if you want us to all follow the rule of "respecting others", then perhaps you should stop being uncharitable towards Christians.
Just sayin'.

So don't be lecturing us about "the golden rule Jesus taught" when you break that rule every time you post. Remember Jesus' teaching about taking the beam out of your eye?

 

[Aaron32]

Exactly.

I'm glad we can agree on something.

And the examples I gave were neither true, nor valid.
Just as your theology is neither true, nor valid.

I disagree. If you could provide more details of your claim, I'd be happy to respond.

Oh really?
So you're saying the Bible is merely a figment of my imagination?

No, but your interpretation could be.

Just as it is trivial to prove Mormonism false.

If you say so.

 

[Aaron32]

So he got ONE prophecy right (and a self-fulfilling prophecy at that), and that makes him a "prophet"? I don't think so. If I tell you that tomorrow I'm going to have dinner, and then tomorrow I have dinner, does that make me a "prophet"?

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Lol!

If you get only ONE "prophecy" wrong, that makes you a FALSE prophet.

Ok. But prophecy, in many cases, is just a subjective as biblical interpretation.

Neither Abraham nor David claimed polygamy was from God, and supposed to be practiced. So it's apples and oranges.

Yet, they did it. And they are respected in the Bible.

<Chuckle>
You should tell that to Jesus, and to Paul, who taught us to study the Scriptures.

Jesus ordained messengers to preach, and Paul preached himself, in addition to taught us to study the scriptures.

That's pretty pointless if we can't interpret it.

Not necessarily. Its the difference between materially sufficient vs formally sufficient.

And where does the BIBLE teach that one needs "authority" to interpret Scripture?

This is worthy of a thread all of it's own. so forgive me for taking the lazy route.

Authority to Teach

How were early Christians to know who was teaching the truth? Was there a way to discern who was teaching Christ’s truth and who was not? There was.

www.catholic.com

Yes, because many people ignore context.

Context at what level though?
Meaning changes as to the degree we make the connections to other scriptures.
For example, the phrase "one God" for non-Mormon Christians is taken at a Biblical level, but Mormons see that at just an Old Testament level.
Baptism not required to see the kingdom of God, non-Mormon Christians may isolate to that individual conversation with Nicodemous, but Mormons see the connection of baptism throughout the New Testament.

You also misinterpret Scripture because you project outside doctrines into it.

As do you, thus interpretations are subjective.

 

[Aaron32]

Prove that God DID speak to Joseph.
I've got time... I'll wait...

Sign seeker, eh? Jesus couldn't even perform miracles to those who doubted Him, why should I expect a different result?
All I can offer is Jesus advice: ask, seek, and knock: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm?lang=eng
Stop trying to change the subject.

This is the forum for discussing MORMONISM.

Yes. And Mormons believe the Bible, and bible interpretations are subjective as evident in by history which you now want to run away from.

I suppose if you want to go along your path, we could discuss all the MORMON sects which contradict each other...

Yes. You certainly could.

2 Tim. 3:16.

John 14:26; Eph. 4:11-13

But even if there is more than "God's word", Mormonism still contradicts the Bible.

I disagree.

 

[Theo1689]

Ok. But prophecy, in many cases, is just a subjective as biblical interpretation.

<Chuckle>

If that were true, discussion forums would be a waste of time.

If that were true, sending Mormon "missionaries" door to door would be a colossal waste of time.

So clearly Mormons don't believe that.

Yet, they did it. And they are respected in the Bible.

Please quote where either Abraham or David said they were commanded by God to practice polygamy.

Abraham practiced polygamy because he DIDN'T trust God's promise to give him an heir.
David practiced polygamy because he lusted after Bathsheba, another man's wife (which was adultery).

Not necessarily. Its the difference between materially sufficient vs formally sufficient.

<Chuckle>
Now you're taking plays from the Romanist playbook.

This is worthy of a thread all of it's own. so forgive me for taking the lazy route.

Authority to Teach

How were early Christians to know who was teaching the truth? Was there a way to discern who was teaching Christ’s truth and who was not? There was.

www.catholic.com

I don't know if you're aware of this, but I'm not Catholic.
Just because they claim one must have "authority to teach" (for the same reason Mormons do, as an excuse to reject Scripture teachings which contradict their/your theology), doesn't make it true.

Context at what level though?
Meaning changes as to the degree we make the connections to other scriptures.
For example, the phrase "one God" for non-Mormon Christians is taken at a Biblical level, but Mormons see that at just an Old Testament level.

Truth is truth.
It doesn't change from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
And monotheism is found in the NT as well as the OT (Mark 12:32, John 17:3, 1 Cor. 8:4, Eph. 4:6, 1 Thess. 1:9, 1 Tim. 2:5, 1 John 5:20, etc. etc.).

Baptism not required to see the kingdom of God, non-Mormon Christians may isolate to that individual conversation with Nicodemous, but Mormons see the connection of baptism throughout the New Testament.

You keep ignoring the FACT that it is NOT mentioned in John 3:5.
That's the point.
If you are seeing things that don't exist, I can't help you.

As do you, thus interpretations are subjective.

Not at all.
Just because you deny what is plain, and assert that which doesn't exist, doesn't mean that interpretations are subjective.

I guess you can't know that the Earth is spherical, since others believe it is flat, and "interpretations are subjective".

You're being completely ridiculous.
Of course, you're a Mormon, and you have to be, to deflect from the plain teachings of Scripture.

 

[Aaron32]

You said respect others' beliefs.
Now you're changing it to respect others.
Make up your mind, okay?

This tells me you're more interested in "gotcha" points than actually having an honest discussion.
Sorry, I'm not here to bicker.

 

[Theo1689]

Sign seeker, eh? Jesus couldn't even perform miracles to those who doubted Him, why should I expect a different result?

What?
If I challenge you to prove God spoke to Joseph, that allegedly makes me a "sign seeker"?
But if you challenge me to prove God DIDN'T speak to him, you're not one?
Double standards much?
Grow up, Aaron...

All I can offer is Jesus advice: ask, seek, and knock: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm?lang=eng
Stop trying to change the subject.

Really?
So if you challenge me to prove something, that's okay,
but if I challenge you to prove the opposite, that's "trying to change the subject"?

That just means that you're a hypocrite, and you demand everyone else proves their point (when our beliefs are NOT the subject of this forum), but Mormons never have to prove THEIR claims (even though your beliefs ARE the topic of this forum).
Double standards much?
Grow up.

Yes. And Mormons believe the Bible, and bible interpretations are subjective as evident in by history which you now want to run away from.

<sigh>
No, you're simply making up excuses to reject what the Bible teaches.

John 14:26; Eph. 4:11-13

What's your point?
(Oh, that's right, you don't have one.)

I disagree.

I don't really care.
You reject the truth.
That's why you're in a cult.

 

[Theo1689]

This tells me you're more interested in "gotcha" points than actually having an honest discussion.
Sorry, I'm not here to bicker.

Wow...

First you said we are suppose to "respect" what other people believe.
Then I said I can't respect evil teachings.
Then you said we should respect each other.
And then I said you changed your claim (which is true).

And now, instead of taking RESPONSIBILITY for what YOU wrote, instead of saying, "I'm sorry, I guess I wasn't clear, I meant respecting people instead of their beliefs), you want to criticize ME for YOUR error?

You are the only one "playing games" here, Aaron.
And once again, you are disobeying Jesus and the Golden Rule by criticizing others for what YOU did.

 

[Aaron32]

<Chuckle>

If that were true, discussion forums would be a waste of time.

Yes. In many ways, it is.

If that were true, sending Mormon "missionaries" door to door would be a colossal waste of time.

No. Missionaries invite people to recognize the Holy Ghost, not just take their word for it.

Please quote where either Abraham or David said they were commanded by God to practice polygamy.

It doesn't matter. They DID practice polygamy, and they are honored and respected in the Bible.

Abraham practiced polygamy because he DIDN'T trust God's promise to give him an heir.
David practiced polygamy because he lusted after Bathsheba, another man's wife (which was adultery).

And yet, they are still respected.

<Chuckle>
Now you're taking plays from the Romanist playbook.

Irrevelant - genetic fallacy

I don't know if you're aware of this, but I'm not Catholic.
Just because they claim one must have "authority to teach" (for the same reason Mormons do, as an excuse to reject Scripture teachings which contradict their/your theology), doesn't make it true.

This still doesn't matter. They use the Bible to support their reasoning. If you have a problem with it, use the Bible to prove it wrong.

Truth is truth.
It doesn't change from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
And monotheism is found in the NT as well as the OT (Mark 12:32, John 17:3, 1 Cor. 8:4, Eph. 4:6, 1 Thess. 1:9, 1 Tim. 2:5, 1 John 5:20, etc. etc.).

The understanding of who God is did change from the OT to the NT. That's why Pharisees didn't believe.

You keep ignoring the FACT that it is NOT mentioned in John 3:5.
That's the point.

That's your criteria.
I still haven't heard an alternative interpretation to the contrary. So what else am supposed to believe? It's always easier to attack than defend, eh?

If you are seeing things that don't exist, I can't help you.

Just as I can't help someone who can't see what does exist.

Not at all.
Just because you deny what is plain, and assert that which doesn't exist, doesn't mean that interpretations are subjective.

When you give your plain explanation, asserting only that which exists, then we can continue the conversation.
Until then, you give me nothing to work with.

I guess you can't know that the Earth is spherical, since others believe it is flat, and "interpretations are subjective".

I explicitly said flat-earth reasoning is not valid. Why do you mis-represent me?

You're being completely ridiculous.
Of course, you're a Mormon, and you have to be, to deflect from the plain teachings of Scripture.

Projection

 

[Theo1689]

No. Missionaries invite people to recognize the Holy Ghost, not just take their word for it.

And people who have the Holy Ghost know that Mormonism is false and that Joseph was a false prophet.

It doesn't matter. They DID practice polygamy, and they are honored and respected in the Bible.

Yes, it DOES matter.
You are ignoring the crucial difference between true Biblical prophets, and the false prophet Joseph.

Joseph proclaimed that polygamy was from God.
Abraham and David never did.

Abraham and David sinned in polygamy (just as Joseph did), but sinning doesn't nullify being a true prophet. But falsely prophesying (as Joseph did) does nullify being a true prophet.

This still doesn't matter. They use the Bible to support their reasoning. If you have a problem with it, use the Bible to prove it wrong.

I have, many times.
But this is not the Romanism forum.
YOU are the one trying to change discussion to Romanism.

Why are you so afraid to actually discuss MORMONISM?

The understanding of who God is did change from the OT to the NT. That's why Pharisees didn't believe.

<sigh>

Let me type REALLY slowly, so you can try to follow this, okay?

The "understanding" of God changed...
But GOD didn't change.

Mal. 3:6 “For I, the LORD, do not change;

"God", and "understanding of God", are NOT the same thing.
Apparently you don't understand that very simple concept.

That's your criteria.
I still haven't heard an alternative interpretation to the contrary. So what else am supposed to believe? It's always easier to attack than defend, eh?

You haven't even TRIED to defend your FALSE claim that "born of water" allegedly means "water baptism".

But if you actually READ the passage, in CONTEXT:

v.4 "... mother's womb ..."
v.5 "... born of water ..."
v.5 "... born of the flesh ..."

Just as I can't help someone who can't see what does exist.

You STILL haven't shown that "water baptism" DOES exist in John 3:3-7.

I explicitly said flat-earth reasoning is not valid. Why do you mis-represent me?

And I explicitly said Mormon "reasoning" is not valid.

Are you understanding now?

 

[Theo1689]

Yes. In many ways, it is.

If you truly believed that (and obviously you don't), why do you waste your time being here?

This still doesn't matter. They use the Bible to support their reasoning. If you have a problem with it, use the Bible to prove it wrong.

So according to you, Roman Catholics don't have "authority" to interpret the Bible.
And according to them, YOU don't have "authority" to interpret the Bible.

But even though you reject their teachings, you misappropriate their "authority to interpret Scripture" doctrine, since you find it useful. A lot of game-playing you're doing.

 

[Aaron32]

Ok. I didn't see where Aaron32 is now the subject, but if this is your chosen path of discussion, in order to defend my character so be it.

Wow...

First you said we are suppose to "respect" what other people believe.
Then I said I can't respect evil teachings. Then you said we should respect each other.

Ok.

And then I said you changed your claim (which is true).

I disagree, making a clarification is clarifying my meaning - it's dis-owning how you interpret my words, and making a restatement. The claim is switched, it was just never received on 1st attempt.

And now, instead of taking RESPONSIBILITY for what YOU wrote, instead of saying, "I'm sorry, I guess I wasn't clear, I meant respecting people instead of their beliefs), you want to criticize ME for YOUR error?

I DID take responsibility for how the message interpreted, by making a clarification.
Clearly, by you restating exactly what I meant, (just not in the form you wanted to hear it), proves that my meaning was accurately conveyed.

You are the only one "playing games" here, Aaron.

No, right now I'm defending my character against a false accusation - hardly a recreational activity.

And once again, you are disobeying Jesus and the Golden Rule by criticizing others for what YOU did.

But I didn't criticize you for what I did. I stated my belief that identifying petty errors, when my meaning was already clearly understood, looks like you're more interested in "gotcha" points than actually having an honest discussion. Seeing as how we're still talking about ME, and not the subject, is only adding evidence to this claim.

How would you prefer me to tell you "stop talking about me, and stick to the subject"?

 

[Aaron32]

What?
If I challenge you to prove God spoke to Joseph, that allegedly makes me a "sign seeker"?
But if you challenge me to prove God DIDN'T speak to him, you're not one?
Double standards much?

I don't think I've heard of sign-seekers to prove something NOT to accept something on faith.
That's doesn't even make sense. The sign is sought for evidence to believe, not dis-believe.
I'm just asking you to substantiate your claim.

Really?
So if you challenge me to prove something, that's okay,
but if I challenge you to prove the opposite, that's "trying to change the subject"?

Actually, challenging to prove the opposite of the claim that YOU made, is an "argument from absence" and "shifting the burden of proof", which is the behavior of a person not wanting to answer a question.
Remember, the whole nature of this particular conversation came from me quoting Proverbs 3:5.
Now, if I had to PROVE God spoke to Joseph Smith, I'd basically be contradicting myself. My evidence is the Book of Mormon, and Jesus' words.

That just means that you're a hypocrite, and you demand everyone else proves their point (when our beliefs are NOT the subject of this forum), but Mormons never have to prove THEIR claims (even though your beliefs ARE the topic of this forum).
Double standards much?
Grow up.

Projection

<sigh>
No, you're simply making up excuses to reject what the Bible teaches.

Projection

What's your point?

That the Bible teaches that truth is also taught by the Spirit and the Church.

(Oh, that's right, you don't have one.)

Nope.

I don't really care.

Then don't about me.

You reject the truth.
That's why you're in a cult.

Projection.