Mormons As "blind Followers"

[Avatar4321]

Yes I knew that but that isn't the point- you are trying to be deceptive. Do they teach that at the MTC?

The doctrines are all the same and none have ever changed. Minor variations in some words exist as does grammar and misspelling have occurred. But never any doctrinal changes like the LDS do pretty much every few years.

Also, I didn't differ from the thread, others did. I just followed their lead by compulsion to answer the cfr's or be stopped by the moderator. So, its not me 'shot-gunning'. Let's stick to the original thread, then. It works good either way.

Still, nobody answered the CFR about JS or Jesus in respect to Jesus' return. Hmmm, Moderator are you there?

No doctrine has changed within the Church nor in the scriptures. Simply asserting it doesnt make it so.

You still are refusing to acknowledge the fact that your sources dont support what you are saying.

[Doctor Steuss]

You have seemed uncharacteristically edgy with this.

I don't know what has made me unable to maintain charity. But there's something about him that just irks me (jason e. has the same type of personality). But, both you and Lamanite have made me look at the type of spirit rocmonkey is bringing about (definately not the spirit of Christ). So, it's probably best if I stay out of this thread from here on out.

Sorry everyone (and rocmonkey) for being such a prick.

I need a smoke.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Again I will restate- for those who missed it. Following someone into a belief system even after the evidence clearly shows him to have been wrong in prophesying the return of Jesus is, indeed, blindly following folks. In this case, obviously, a false prophet- by the fact that Jesus did not return, of course. That is evidence in overdrive. I am sorry you missed it before.

Your evidence is faulty and did not say what you hoped it says. Therefor you have started a strawman again. Google strawman and see what it says. You dance around it as if you have won some great victory. For a small bart of trivia strawmen were set up in the game Dungeon Keeper 2 to train the warriors from level 1-4. I guess I will be leaveing the church now Rocmonkey claims that JS gave a false prophecy, that is good enough for me.( I will blindly leave now.)

[Avatar4321]

Again I will restate- for those who missed it. Following someone into a belief system even after the evidence clearly shows him to have been wrong in prophesying the return of Jesus is, indeed, blindly following folks. In this case, obviously, a false prophet- by the fact that Jesus did not return, of course. That is evidence in overdrive. I am sorry you missed it before.

Once again. You have been repeatedly show that Joseph never prophecied what you claim he did. Your own sources dont support you. Simply ignoring them isnt going to make it somehow true.

Joseph prophecied that the second coming wouldnt be before 1891. And lo and behold, Christ didnt come before 1891. He still hasn't come. Joseph was dead accurate.

[selek]

I don't know what has made me unable to maintain charity. But there's something about him that just urks me. But, both you and Lamanite have made me look at the type of spirit rocmonkey is bringing about (definately not the spirit of Christ). So, it's probably best if I stay out of this thread from here on out.

Perhaps it's the endless iteration of a flawed premise, the incessant name calling, and the eager willingness to damn all Mormons despite the evidence and our own testimonies.

Sorry everyone (and rocmonkey) for being such a prick.

I need a smoke.

Fine. You tie the poo-flinger up and I'll get the torches.

I can't beleive the mods have allowed this abuse to continue.

[jwhitlock]

Yes I knew that but that isn't the point- you are trying to be deceptive. Do they teach that at the MTC?

Gosh, I almost hate to ask for a CFR on teaching deception at the MTC; but, here it is. CFR (Analysis - poster having trouble understanding why Mormons haven't just been bowled over by his claims. So, let's float this one by them...)

The doctrines are all the same and none have ever changed.

Reiteration of bizarre claim that does not fit reality. Addressed in previous post, but not responded to. (Analysis - if I don't respond, they'll give up and go away and I've won by default. Disconnect from reality.)

Minor variations in some words exist as does grammar and misspelling have occurred. But never any doctrinal changes like the LDS do pretty much every few years.

Demonstration of significant lack of comprehension of what LDS doctrine really is and its history. (Analysis - poster can claim anything he wants as a self evident truth and let it stand on its own. Any attempt to refute it is met with derision.)

Also, I didn't differ from the thread, others did. I just followed their lead by compulsion to answer the cfr's or be stopped by the moderator. So, its not me 'shot-gunning'. Let's stick to the original thread, then. It works good either way.

Meager attempt to respond to methodology as brilliantly outlined by Dr. S. (Analysis - ouch!)

Still, nobody answered the CFR about JS or Jesus in respect to Jesus' return. Hmmm, Moderator are you there?

Inability to look up other threads on this board about the second coming and Joseph Smith's prophesy. (Analysis - poor computer skills are no excuse for bad logic.)

[Pahoran]

One more note- If they LDS god is really the one true God why is the Bible unchanged in its doctrines (2,000 years strong) and almost every edition since the first one has been changed? And, the Bom is only a very short 177 years old. Whoa! That speaks volumes in itself.

I notice that you are very very careful to paint in the broadest of broad brush strokes. Of course this may simply be a function of how your mind works--bigots always "think" in oversimplified categories--but it also supports your clear agenda to deceive.

Out of the handful of changes to The Book of Mormon text, can you name even one that actually changes a doctrine? Just one, thanks.

But here is the kicker, Rocmonkey: you don't get to simply throw it out and declare the case closed. You have to be prepared to defend your claim that a doctrine was changed. Only Book of Mormon believers are qualified to provide doctrinal interpretations of The Book of Mormon, so your interpretations have to stand up to our scrutiny.

Are you up for it?

Even the newest ed. says things have been changed because "errors" have been perpetuated. They say its "now" the whole truth.

Really? Where? CFR, please.

However, they published a duplicate of the original in 1980 (150th Anniversary ed.) and the new one is nothing like the original.

What, nothing like the original?

How many brazen, glaring falsehoods do you expect to get away with telling?

The total number of changes to The Book of Mormon, across all editions, is less than 4000. That includes completely superficial changes such as punctuation corrections, the dropping of "a" before a verb ending in ing and spelling corrections, but obviously not chapter and verse divisions. The actual changes to the text--which is around 238,000 words long--are very few indeed. Anyone who actually reads both editions side by side, instead of being stupid enough to swallow your claims, will see that the two are identical in all respects, with rare and insignificant variations.

(By comparison, I note that there are over 150,000 variant readings in the New Testament manuscripts alone.)

Incidentally, if you knew anything about anything at all, you would know that in the developmental history of any document, most of the changes are going to come early on.

Which ed. is the most correct

The latest (1981) one, obviously. Just so you know--not that you actually care about accuracy--that edition was prompted by the recovery of the manuscript that had been placed in a "time capsule" in Nauvoo.

and who is trying to deceive (lie to) the members and the world?

Oh, that's easy: you are. Every single moment that your keyboard is active.

These are the evidences that tell the truth of this story.

So they do.

Regards,

Pahoran

[jwhitlock]

Again I will restate- for those who missed it. Following someone into a belief system even after the evidence clearly shows him to have been wrong in prophesying the return of Jesus is, indeed, blindly following folks. In this case, obviously, a false prophet- by the fact that Jesus did not return, of course. That is evidence in overdrive. I am sorry you missed it before.

Evidence in overdrive - away from the scene of the crime. Still ignoring previous discussions of Joseph Smith's prophecy. (Analysis - totally erroneous comprehension about what the meaning is of the word "evidence". Demonstrated ability to apply a cute, catchy phrase (overdrive?) to the term to give it some kind of hoped for credence. Unfortunately, false hope.)

[Maidservant]

there appears to be a clear stipulation with following your leader.

I will cop to following my leaders and obeying the prophet and God any day, any time! I don't cede to the 'blind'. I am trying to obey as many gospel and life principles as fast as I become aware of them and become able. I do start out with an assumption that I will obey what I hear from the pulpit -- it's quicker that way, to have trust be part of it -- but if there is something that I am thinking about or that worries me -- why I will go ahead and learn what I need to about it, being open to the possibility that it isn't right for me -- on the other hand I'm careful with that attitude, because I do trust that revelation comes through priesthood channels -- again, otherwise why even bother being a Mormon if I'm not comfortable with that premise? But, as has been said, I am also expected and entitled to get personal revelation on any matter that comes from the pulpit. Obedience rocks!!! But I'm not blind.

I live by what's been recorded. If there's a contradiction, always use the oldest source for the truth.

Well, you are judging us by your own standard. This standard is not Biblical. It also does not encapsulate the LDS way of thinking. We do not live by what is recorded, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4). That can be understood to be modern revelation with modern prophets.

This is all one need know to see if Mormonism is true or not. ['quote]

No, it isn't all a person needs to know if trying to determine if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the true and living church on the earth today.

If it was founded by a man whose prophecy never happened then its all false.

No, that isn't the test of truth. An unfulfilled prophecy is not a test for whether the gospel is true.

the men on moon Are you saying the LDS church accepted ?

The LDS Church has never taught -- even during Joseph Smith's day -- that men lived on the moon. The moon has never been a topic of any Sunday School lesson or Sacrament meeting talk -- one way or the other. We don't learn about the moon at church. We learn about the Savior and his atonement and his teachings and how to live our daily lives. I take it back -- the Sunbeams -- the 3 year olds -- do have a lesson on the moon -- that God created it! LDS people believe as others do about the nature of the moon. There is nothing odd here. Please read the 13 Articles of Faith for a primer in Mormon doctrine.

The LDS Church also does not teach a time when the Savior will come -- only that it is soon; that we need to prepare; that there are signs of the times; and that no man knows when it will be. Isn't this what your church teaches??

[Zakuska]

Job 20: 7

7 Yet he shall perish for ever like his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he?

[rocmonkey]

I'm so tempted to unleash the Tyler upon him... but there is something within me that pities him.

What to do, what to do...

I guess, unsheathe your sword if you wish. But I will not be held accountable if rocmonkey cries after being intellectually slapped by your Biblical Greatness.

*Bowing, and digging a grave*

Brilliant!!!!

Oh, the joys of evil.

I can't pull up the Ezekiel lied site. What does it say? He lied? OK, he was a man. Did you really expect perfection from any man? King David was an adulterer and a murderer. Paul said he was the chief of sinners. Men are sinners by nature. We will sin every day we breathe. The object of a personal relationship with Jesus is to be broken over our sins, not sinless.

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

[Pahoran]

Still, nobody answered the CFR about JS or Jesus in respect to Jesus' return. Hmmm, Moderator are you there?

I don't know, but I'm here to answer your CFR.

Again I will restate- for those who missed it. Following someone into a belief system even after the evidence clearly shows him to have been wrong in prophesying the return of Jesus is, indeed, blindly following folks. In this case, obviously, a false prophet- by the fact that Jesus did not return, of course. That is evidence in overdrive. I am sorry you missed it before.

Well then, let's look at the actual evidence, shall we?

No hate-based spin.

No ranting anti-Christian accusations against the Lord's servant.

Just the evidence, straight from the source.

Doctrine and Covenants 130:

14 I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following:

15 Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.

16 I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face.

17 I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.

There it is. All of it.

So feel free, Rocmonkey, to point out what part of that you think is a prophecy, and wherein that prophecy failed.

While we are at it, the immediately preceding verses do indeed contain a prophecy. Would you like to see them?

12 I prophesy, in the name of the Lord God, that the commencement of the difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in South Carolina.

13 It may probably arise through the slave question. This a voice declared to me, while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 25th, 1832.

Notice, please, what Joseph says when he is actually prophesying something.

Notice also that this prophecy was in fact fulfilled.

Now Rocmonkey, you have a choice before you. Either you can continue to rant and bluster and accuse and spew hatred and venom, and then claim that it is "love," thus proving that you don't know the difference, or you can learn how Christians conduct interfaith dialogue, and conduct yourself accordingly.

Which shall it be?

Regards,

Pahoran

[jwhitlock]

I don't know what has made me unable to maintain charity. But there's something about him that just irks me (jason e. has the same type of personality). But, both you and Lamanite have made me look at the type of spirit rocmonkey is bringing about (definately not the spirit of Christ). So, it's probably best if I stay out of this thread from here on out.

Sorry everyone (and rocmonkey) for being such a prick.

I need a smoke.

I won't comment on the other poster other than to say I had to quit responding. My mind was starting to become unhinged in trying to make any sense out of him.

Actually, I've enjoyed your posts. If this is about as uncharitable as you get, then hats off to you. I've got a looonnnng way to go.

If you can't find a pack, try the missionaries. They often have some lying around that they've taken as part of the WofW discussions.

[selek]

I can't pull up the Ezekiel lied site. What does it say? He lied? OK, he was a man. Did you really expect perfection from any man? King David was an adulterer and a murderer. Paul said he was the chief of sinners. Men are sinners by nature. We will sin every day we breathe. The object of a personal relationship with Jesus is to be broken over our sins, not sinless.

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

Thank you for the concession. According to the standard you yourself put forward you must now throw away your Bible. It endorses as prophets at least three men, Jonah, Ezekial, and at least one other who have all lied. Their prophecies did not come true.

You have been told again, again, and again that you have the prophecy wrong.

You ignore that, and only make yourself look foolish and dishonest by doing so.

[MorningStar]

I can't pull up the Ezekiel lied site. What does it say? He lied? OK, he was a man. Did you really expect perfection from any man? King David was an adulterer and a murderer. Paul said he was the chief of sinners. Men are sinners by nature. We will sin every day we breathe. The object of a personal relationship with Jesus is to be broken over our sins, not sinless.

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

So you don't believe Jonah was a prophet?

[jwhitlock]

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

Still no response about other biblical scriptures given that disprove poster's "analysis" of what a prophet is. (Analysis - willingness to ignore any evidence to the contrary of his claims.)

[rocmonkey]

Gosh, I almost hate to ask for a CFR on teaching deception at the MTC; but, here it is. CFR (Analysis - poster having trouble understanding why Mormons haven't just been bowled over by his claims. So, let's float this one by them...) [/

quote]

It was a question. Do you know what a "question" is. I did not state it as fact. So no cfr applies.

Reiteration of bizarre claim that does not fit reality. Addressed in previous post, but not responded to. (Analysis - if I don't respond, they'll give up and go away and I've won by default. Disconnect from reality.)

Demonstration of significant lack of comprehension of what LDS doctrine really is and its history. (Analysis - poster can claim anything he wants as a self evident truth and let it stand on its own. Any attempt to refute it is met with derision.)

Meager attempt to respond to methodology as brilliantly outlined by Dr. S. (Analysis - ouch!)

Inability to look up other threads on this board about the second coming and Joseph Smith's prophesy. (Analysis - poor computer skills are no excuse for bad logic.)

Hey, some of you brought up this stuff and I'm just responding to the thread by giving evidence. This is all too often the case with Mormonism- the only answer that can be given will seldom be. That's ok. I'm not here to convert but to inform. What you do with that- justify, rationalize, ignore, refuse, reject- is solely up to you. I do feel you pain, though. Its hard to defend the indefensible, huh? If folks like me show enough evidence some of you will 'get' it. That's the good part.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I can't pull up the Ezekiel lied site. What does it say? He lied? OK, he was a man. Did you really expect perfection from any man? King David was an adulterer and a murderer. Paul said he was the chief of sinners. Men are sinners by nature. We will sin every day we breathe. The object of a personal relationship with Jesus is to be broken over our sins, not sinless.

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

So you admit that Ezekiel could have lied. Then you dismiss it as it is not relavent. Oh I get it now, it ok if some one in the Bible lies but its not if JS "lied". Got it. Nice double standard here.

[Zakuska]

Mr. Monkeys Prophet Ruler

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails

1) you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others)

2) those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets

3) God's word never fails, ever

Lets put His ruler to the line... and his double standard to the plum...

Here is Ezekiels lie...

Ezekiel 26

7

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Hey, some of you brought up this stuff and I'm just responding to the thread by giving evidence. This is all too often the case with Mormonism- the only answer that can be given will seldom be. That's ok. I'm not here to convert but to inform. What you do with that- justify, rationalize, ignore, refuse, reject- is solely up to you. I do feel you pain, though. Its hard to defend the indefensible, huh? If folks like me show enough evidence some of you will 'get' it. That's the good part.

Evidence. HA. I dont think you know what evidence is. I can prove rocmonkey lied. John 17:1 says so. There is my CFR. See how it works. I can play your game too.

[rocmonkey]

I don't know, but I'm here to answer your CFR.

Well then, let's look at the actual evidence, shall we?

No hate-based spin.

No ranting anti-Christian accusations against the Lord's servant.

Just the evidence, straight from the source.

Doctrine and Covenants 130:

14 I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following:

15 Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.

16 I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face.

17 I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.

There it is. All of it.

So feel free, Rocmonkey, to point out what part of that you think is a prophecy, and wherein that prophecy failed.

While we are at it, the immediately preceding verses do indeed contain a prophecy. Would you like to see them?

12 I prophesy, in the name of the Lord God, that the commencement of the difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in South Carolina.

13 It may probably arise through the slave question. This a voice declared to me, while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 25th, 1832.

Notice, please, what Joseph says when he is actually prophesying something.

Now Rocmonkey, you have a choice before you. Either you can continue to rant and bluster and accuse an spew hatred and venom, and then prove that you don't know the difference by claiming that it is "love," or you can learn how Christians conduct interfaith dialogue.

Which shall it be?

Regards,

Pahoran

Oh Pahoran, not the watered down version (DC). The 'one' I quoted from JS Teachings! I gave it so go back and read it.

When you use the DC you must know some of it has been changed to fit the times. This is another example of that. Please (please) CFR this statement.

If you can't answer, that's ok. Most don't even try so you're doing better than most. You still didn't answer my quote of JS prophecy, though. Its one of those 'new and improved' versions I mentioned earlier that the LDS do a lot when changing their doctrines to fit the culture, times and events that always hit them (and their god?) by surprise.

[Doctor Steuss]

I can't pull up the Ezekiel lied site. What does it say? He lied? OK, he was a man. Did you really expect perfection from any man? King David was an adulterer and a murderer. Paul said he was the chief of sinners. Men are sinners by nature. We will sin every day we breathe. The object of a personal relationship with Jesus is to be broken over our sins, not sinless.

But, when you give a Prophecy from Almighty God and it fails, one- you are not a prophet of God (Deut.18:20-22, 1 Jn.4:1 and others), two, those who follow you do so by rejecting the truth of God's word pertaining to false prophets and three, God's word never fails, ever, so Jesus should have come back 'if' JS is a true prophet. (Mos. 2:22, 3 Ne.27:18, DC 1:37, 76:3, Abr.3:17, DC 3:1-3)

*Big breath*

I should probably refrain from responding, but hopefully I will be able to maintain the level of charity that I give to other posters.

The "ezekiel-lied" site is an ongoing joke between structurecop and I (one that he coined... just so he gets the due credit). There is no actual site. It is in regards to Ezekiel giving failed prophecies, yet still being considered a prophet.

Jonah would be another example of a failed prophecy. He even got mad at G-d because the prophecy failed (G-d changed his mind, despite the fact that there was no contingency placed on the prophecy).

Prophecy is conditional by its very nature, thus, as Latter-day Saints, we are able to look at the Biblical accounts and not be worried by the failed prophecies of Biblical prophets. Most of us donâ??t have double standards.

Also, I'm not sure why you're quoting LDS scripture to support your views. We are well aware of what our scriptures say, and we (as the believers) are the ones with the right to interpret them. Here are the canonized words of Joseph (canonized scripture is all that we are necessarily bound by) regarding Christ's coming again:

D&C 130

14 I was once praying very earnestly to know the time of the coming of the Son of Man, when I heard a voice repeat the following:

15 Joseph, my son, if thou livest until thou art eighty-five years old, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man; therefore let this suffice, and trouble me no more on this matter.

16 I was left thus, without being able to decide whether this coming referred to the beginning of the millennium or to some previous appearing, or whether I should die and thus see his face.

17 I believe the coming of the Son of Man will not be any sooner than that time.

As we can see, there is a condition within this prophecy ("if though livest..."). Joseph never reached that age because of the "Christians" that murdered him. Joseph wasn't even sure what it meant as is demonstrated in 16 and 17. If the very man who gave the prophecy didn't even know the full meaning behind the words, what right does someone such as yourself have to give them meaning that Joseph Smith himself did not necessarily attribute to them.

A well researched (yet brief) resource regarding this particular prophecy and the melieu that it occurred in can be found in: Joseph Smith and the Millenariam Time Table

Edited to add:

This is from the article I linked earlier that you evidently didn't care to read (regarding prophecy). These are the keys to evaluating a "false prophecy":

Is the source authentic or is it hearsay?

Is the statement accurately quoted?

Does the statement claim to be a direct revelation from God?

Does the quote claim to be a prophecy, or is it a statement of commandment, instruction, etc.?

Is it clearly intended to be literal (not poetic, a figure of speech, etc.)?

Is there a definite time limit set for its fulfillment, not simply "shortly," "nigh," "soon," etc.?

Are there any stated conditions to the prophecy?

Are there any possible unstated conditions to the prophecy?

Is there only one possible interpretation?

Can it be shown beyond dispute that the time of fulfillment is past?

[jwhitlock]

Hey, some of you brought up this stuff and I'm just responding to the thread by giving evidence. This is all too often the case with Mormonism- the only answer that can be given will seldom be. That's ok. I'm not here to convert but to inform. What you do with that- justify, rationalize, ignore, refuse, reject- is solely up to you. I do feel you pain, though. Its hard to defend the indefensible, huh? If folks like me show enough evidence some of you will 'get' it. That's the good part.

This is really cute. You're here to inform us!

Could you do us a favor? As you "inform" us, it's sometimes hard to figure out what in the heck you're saying. You know, grammar, and all that. For instance, can you explain:

This is all too often the case with Mormonism- the only answer that can be given will seldom be.

I do hate to be nitpicky, but your posts are sometimes really disconnected because of unclear sentences (unclear, as in "what the heck is he saying here???").

I do feel you pain, though.

Golly, this could be taken several ways. Did you mean "your" instead of "you"?

I do think you overestimate (and that's being charitable) your ability to present what you call "evidence". However, if you would like to respond to the specifics I've posted, feel free. You do have a tendency to ignore facts that undercut your preconceived notions.

[rocmonkey]

Yes I believe Jonah was a prophet.

[Doctor Steuss]

Since I just noticed rocmonkey having a problem with Pahoranâ??s analysis since it utilized D&C, I will go a bit further for RM.

From History of the Church, Vol.5, pp.336-37

"I prophesy in the name of the Lord God, and let it be written--the Son of Man will not come in the clouds of heaven till I am eighty-five years old."

It does not say that Christ will come at a given time; it says He will not come until a given time. Joseph never reached that age due to the "Christians" that murdered him.

Then, History of the Church, Vol.6, p.254

I also prophesy, in the name of the Lord, that Christ will not come in forty years; and if God ever spoke by my mouth, He will not come in that length of time. Brethren, when you go home, write this down, that it may be remembered.

Jesus Christ never did reveal to any man the precise time that He would come. Go and read the Scriptures, and you cannot find anything that specifies the exact hour He would come; and all that say so are false teachers.

Here Joseph is once again saying Christ will not come before a given time. He is not giving a definitive time; in fact he goes on to say that any who do give an exact hour are false teachers (why would he call himself a false teacher? -- answer, he isn't giving an exact date).

I hope you will have the intellectual honesty to abandon this little chest-nut of yours. You need not worry about leaving it behind as I imagine there is plenty more in your repertoire that will help you maintain disbelief in the LDS Church and continue to think we don't know how to research nor find truth.