CQUIRK Posted February 12, 2011 Posted February 12, 2011 But you don't hear even the catholic church calling them "anti-catholic" or a professional anti- this or that. Only mormons do that. I wonder why? http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0705tbt.asphttp://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num39.htmFor further info-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_literature_and_mediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Chiniquy (Could be Considered as the Ed Decker of Catholicism during his day).Please actually do some research, Hughes; your apparent ignorance is really making you look bad here, as well as making me laugh harder
Pahoran Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 It is a signed affidavit sworn out by Peter Ingersall before Judge Baldwin of Wayne County Court in New York in December, 1833. He recounts what Joseph told him:1. Mormonism and the Mormons: a historical view of the rise and progress of the sect self-styled Latter-day saints, by Daniel Parish Kidder page 232. The Mormon's own book: or Mormonism tried by its own standards - reason and scripture, with an account of its present condition, page 27"Accordingly, I told them that I had received a command to let no man see it, ' Tor,' says I,' no man can see it with the naked eye and live.' However, I offered to take out the book and show it to them, but they refused to see it, and left the room."3. The history of the saints, or, An expos
Calm Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Ingersoll's story implies that the first time JS's family heard of the "Gold Bible" is when he walked through the door with the pile of sand he misrepresented to be the plates. This ignores a number of statements by family members of discussions prior to this time about their existence.There appears to be very little in Ingersoll's story that is consistent with any of the actual participants' statement or even many of the critics' IIRC....if so, it doesn't even begin to meet the standard of credible witness.
CQUIRK Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I know, the accuracy and depth of his research makes great comic fodder indeed!
Seeker of Truth Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 How can this be...you ask?Well, I'm sure that since she was a prominent member of the LDS Church, she already HAD a testimony of the Book of Mormon and of Joseph Smith as a true prophet. The promise in Moroni 10:3-5, canbe used to gain a witness of truthfulness of ANY book, not just the Book of Mormon. Remember, verse 5 states that "by the power of the holy ghost ye may know the truth of ALL THINGS!" Don't forget,that "by their fruits ye shall know them". If Ida received a witness that the sealed portion, which he( Nemelka) claims to have translated, is true...then wouldn't it mean also that he must be a true prophet? You can't know of the sealed portions truthfulness without reading it with a sincere heart, with real intent....any more than you can know of the truthfulness of the B of M without reading it with a sincere heart, and with real intent...right? That is...if the promise made by Moroni in Chapter 10 is valid, which I think we both do.
LDS Guy 1986 Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 . If Ida received a witness that the sealed portion, which he( Nemelka) claims to have translated, is true...then wouldn't it mean also that he must be a true prophet? Not at all, if this was the case then Muhammad is a true prophet also. Muhammad is a false prophet because he preaches an other Gospel (one the denies that Christ is the Son of God) that he said he received from the Angel (edited because I wasn't paying attention and put Moroni! LOL) Gabriel Nemelka is a false prophet, because the scriptures say that the LDS Church is the one true Church of Christ and will stand till Christ returns. The scriptures also says that only the President of the Church can receive revelation for the entire world. Both cases men claim to be a prophet but violate the scriptures in doing so, they failed there tests there fruit is not good, they are both false prophets.
CQUIRK Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 If Ida received a witness that the sealed portion, which he( Nemelka) claims to have translated, is true...then wouldn't it mean also that he must be a true prophet?He's no Joseph Smith at all; for one, the evidence against him and his 'book' is solid and unquestionable.Another thing about his book- Case Closed!
GingerRed Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 I tried reading his so-called 'translation' of these 'sealed plates'...and I have to admit, I had to laugh!! I don't know how many of you skimmed through it to see how it was written, but I could sure tell it was phoney just by the how modern it sounded, with some 'and it came to passes' etc, thrown in! Heck I could write that! When I saw the part about the Heavenly Mother scene, I was like okay I've seen enough!! This is unreal! I can NOT beleive that poor woman was SO taken in by this man!! I also read the parts of this guys life and criminal rap sheet...oh come on! He even looks creepy to me! Seeker Of Truth...no one saying she didn't feel 'something'..but that doesn't mean she felt the Holy Ghost witnessing to her...she never said anything along the lines of the Holy Ghost verified and testified to her, did she? Do you not beleive in the power of sometimes hearing what you WANT to hear because you WANT it so bad? She wanted this information SO badly the first wing-nut that came along and offered it to her, she was hooked. And like others have said, their can only be one prophet on the earth at any given time. And no one gave any authority to his claim.Red
kolipoki09 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Not at all, if this was the case then Muhammad is a true prophet also. Muhammad is a false prophet because he preaches an other Gospel (one the denies that Christ is the Son of God) that he said he received from the Angel Moroni. Last time I checked, the jury was still out on Muhammad. I've opened myself up to the idea that Muhammad was probably more inspired and connected with the divine than most Latter-day Saints are willing to consider. Before commenting on Muhammad further, I would suggest you read two very important pieces of literature, the first being the Holy Qur'an (honestly, how many Mormons do you know who have read it entirely?) and this. ???? ????
TAO Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Muhammad is a false prophet because he preaches an other Gospel (one the denies that Christ is the Son of God) that he said he received from the Angel Moroni. Wrong Angel. He said it was from the Angel Gabriel.
kolipoki09 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Wrong Angel. He said it was from the Angel Gabriel.Not only did he receive it from Gabriel, he also received it on a high mountain and was given a cosmic tour of God's creation. It sounds remarkably similar to the ascension texts we associate with Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Nephi, not to mention the parallels to the prayer circle found in the hajj.
WalkerW Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 I've opened myself up to the idea that Muhammad was probably more inspired and connected with the divine than most Latter-day Saints are willing to consider.I think the lack of willingness today largely stems from current cultural and political motivations. The attitude toward and understanding of Islam reminds me in large of part of the Enlightenment-era anti-Catholic propaganda and conventional wisdom of the so-called "Dark Ages."
WalkerW Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Not only did he receive it from Gabriel, he also received it on a high mountain and was given a cosmic tour of God's creation. It sounds remarkably similar to the ascension texts we associate with Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Nephi, not to mention the parallels to the prayer circle found in the hajj.To add my voice to this, see this excellent article by Daniel Peterson and Stephen Ricks.
TAO Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 To add my voice to this, see this excellent article by Daniel Peterson and Stephen Ricks.I shall read when I get time, hopefully =).
LDS Guy 1986 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Last time I checked, the jury was still out on Muhammad. I've opened myself up to the idea that Muhammad was probably more inspired and connected with the divine than most Latter-day Saints are willing to consider. Before commenting on Muhammad further, I would suggest you read two very important pieces of literature, the first being the Holy Qur'an (honestly, how many Mormons do you know who have read it entirely?) and this. ???? ????I guess that you never read the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians then?It clearly says that men like Muhammad who proclaim the Christ is not the Son of God, but simply a prophet are false. Muhammad preaches another Gospel one that conflicts with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, he also conflicts with the Book of Genesis when he says that Ishmael not Isaac was taken to be offered as a sacrifice. When he has making his fake gospel he could of at least gotten the Old Testament right if he wanted people to believe his false teachings about women being inferior to men, being able to be beaten by there husbands, and even stoned to death by there husbands. This is not the teachings of Jesus Christ, it is the lies of the great deceiver.
LDS Guy 1986 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Wrong Angel. He said it was from the Angel Gabriel.You are right! LOL I put Moroni not Gabriel! I am sorry about that I will fix it!
LDS Guy 1986 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Not only did he receive it from Gabriel, he also received it on a high mountain and was given a cosmic tour of God's creation. It sounds remarkably similar to the ascension texts we associate with Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Nephi, not to mention the parallels to the prayer circle found in the hajj.Yes, but Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Nephi didn't proclaim that Christ was not the Son of God but only a prophet. See just because his claims seems authentic doesn't mean it is. He is accused as we are told in Galatians for claiming to of received another Gospel that did not preach that Jesus is the Son of God.
kolipoki09 Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 I guess that you never read the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians then?It clearly says that men like Muhammad who proclaim the Christ is not the Son of God, but simply a prophet are false. Muhammad preaches another Gospel one that conflicts with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, he also conflicts with the Book of Genesis when he says that Ishmael not Isaac was taken to be offered as a sacrifice. When he has making his fake gospel he could of at least gotten the Old Testament right if he wanted people to believe his false teachings about women being inferior to men, being able to be beaten by there husbands, and even stoned to death by there husbands. This is not the teachings of Jesus Christ, it is the lies of the great deceiver."False teachings" of women being inferior to men? I'd like a specific reference in the Qur'an (a book you've evidently not read) and I'd also ask you to explain how you reconcile these verses in light of what you've just said. "Husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered." 1 Peter 3:7"He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." Proverbs 13:24"Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." Proverbs 22:15"Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell." Proverbs 23:13-14Now how exactly is that all together different from Surah 4:34?
WalkerW Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 (honestly, how many Mormons do you know who have read it entirely?) Considering I know plenty of Mormons who haven't read the Bible in its entirety, I don't find this at all shocking.
WalkerW Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 he also conflicts with the Book of Genesis when he says that Ishmael not Isaac was taken to be offered as a sacrifice.While a belief held in Islamic circles, this is actually nowhere to be found in the Qu'ran.
Fifth Columnist Posted February 22, 2011 Author Posted February 22, 2011 I tried reading his so-called 'translation' of these 'sealed plates'...and I have to admit, I had to laugh!! I don't know how many of you skimmed through it to see how it was written, but I could sure tell it was phoney just by the how modern it sounded, with some 'and it came to passes' etc, thrown in! Heck I could write that! When I saw the part about the Heavenly Mother scene, I was like okay I've seen enough!! This is unreal! I can NOT beleive that poor woman was SO taken in by this man!! I also read the parts of this guys life and criminal rap sheet...oh come on! He even looks creepy to me!You clearly didn't approach this correctly. First, you have to desire to believe it. You must approach it with the hope that it is true. Second, you must read the entire thing and then ask God with real intent that it is true. You obviously haven't followed those steps. Only if you do so will you receive a confirming witness that it is true.Seeker Of Truth...no one saying she didn't feel 'something'..but that doesn't mean she felt the Holy Ghost witnessing to her...she never said anything along the lines of the Holy Ghost verified and testified to her, did she? Do you not beleive in the power of sometimes hearing what you WANT to hear because you WANT it so bad? She wanted this information SO badly the first wing-nut that came along and offered it to her, she was hooked.Wanting it to be true (i.e., desiring to believe) is part of the formula to determine if it is true. I can't see why she is faulted for that.Her experience is virtually indistinguishable to an experience recounted in the Liahona (I have linked to it many times in this thread). The only difference is the subject matter (Sealed Portion for Ida; BOM for the guy in the Liahona). Her experience seems just as valid as the guy in the Liahona.And like others have said, their can only be one prophet on the earth at any given time. And no one gave any authority to his claim.RedYou reached the conclusion that there "can only be one prophet on the earth at any give time" through some type of spiritual experience. This is exactly how Ida reached an opposite conclusion. I can't see any reason to give your experience greater credence than hers.
Mighty Change of Heart Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 If anyone is interested in meeting Christopher and asking him ANYTHING in person, he is giving the opportunity:Here's your chance--CRITICS, ENEMIES, DISBELIEVERS, PRESS, AUTHORS, SCHOLARS, EXPERTS, ARCHIVISTS, ATTORNEYS, the CALLED or CHOSEN, PROPHETS, SEERS & REVELATORS, POPES, PRIESTS, BISHOPS, ETC., and DOUBTERS & CURIOUS--to meet CHRISTOPHER, the translator of the SEALED PORTION of the Book of Mormon and prove or disprove him now herewith.Saturday March 19th, 2011SLC, UT Main Library (210 E. 400 S) in the Main Auditorium10 AM-4 PM Free and Open to the PUBLIC (no registration required)All CHRISTOPHER'S critics, enemies, etc., are now put on notice that they will have their chance; and if they fail to show up, the integrity of their public and private critiques, their false declarations, disparagement and innuendo will be duly noted.We will run the event by the number system, setting up microphones and allowing only those who are critics, enemies, etc., to request a number before entering the theater. (A "friend" may also take a number if he or she has a critical concern.) Once we have gone through the numbers once, then we'll start over again allowing each one an opportunity to ask more questions. They can only ask one question at a time and must allow Christopher the opportunity to answer it, he will then allow them a brief counter question, but limiting the exchange to not more than 5 minutes for each question/issue for the sake of others who might attend and also wish to participate.Any questions or concerns please contact Rod Vessels (612-860-0026) orJulie Taggart (801-577-1928)
Vex Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Well... a lot of good that will do me. Anyone planning on attending?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 All CHRISTOPHER'S critics, enemies, etc., are now put on notice that they will have their chance; and if they fail to show up, the integrity of their public and private critiques, their false declarations, disparagement and innuendo will be duly noted.Who gives a crap if you or any one else's of Nemelka's cohorts will duly note our integrity if we critics fail to show up.He can come on here and defend himself. It will be duly noted of his integrity if he fails to do so and come here.It is so easy to assert things.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.