September 28, 2009 by Pilgrim

What do Mormons think about Islam?

We’ve already seen what Mormonism has historically taught and believed about Christians (in spite of their current ecumenical, seeker-friendly image presented to the public). But what is the Mormon position on Islam, the religion of the sword? The following quotes may surprise you.

There had been men, doubtless many men in the various ages of the world, who had light and who had a degree of the Spirit of God. I believe myself that Mahomed, whom the Christians deride and call a false prophet and stigmatize with a great many epithets—I believe that he was a man raised up by the Almighty, and inspired to a certain extent by Him to effect the reforms which he did in his land, and in the nations surrounding. George Q. Cannon, 1883, Journal of Discourses, Volume 24 Page 371

The great religious leaders of the world such as Muhammad, Confucius, and the Reformers . . . received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals. . . . Our message therefore is one of special love and concern for the eternal welfare of all men and women, regardless of religious belief, race or nationality, knowing that we are truly brothers and sisters because we are sons and daughters of the same Eternal Father. In an original letter From the First Presidency, Reference: Apocryphal Writings and the Latter-day Saints, C. Wilfred Griggs (editor), February 15, 1978, Page 29

Latter-day Saints accept all truth, wherever it may be found, as part of our religion—whether in the Quran or in other good books. David Stewart, 2003, Message of Friendship: Muslims and Latter-day Saints, Page 1

Latter-day Saints recognize Muslims as brothers and sisters, children of our Heavenly Father, with whom we can find much common ground. LDS Prophet and Apostle Gordon B. Hinckley stated: “we value our Muslim neighbors across the world.” Latter-day Saints respect the strong family values and moral accomplishments of Muslims as well as Islamic contributions to science, literature, history, philosophy, medicine, and the arts. David Stewart, 2003, A Message of Friendship: Muslims and Latter-day Saints, Page 1

Latter-day Saints recognize the terms God and Allah to refer to the same being in different languages. David Stewart, 2003, A Message of Friendship: Muslims and Latter-day Saints, Pages 1-2

Similarities can be found between the “Five Pillars of Islam” and LDS beliefs. David Stewart, 2003, A Message of Friendship: Muslims and Latter-day Saints, Page 2

Muslims strive to perform a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in one’s lifetime. The travels of the early Latter-day Saint pioneers are in many ways comparable to those of devout Muslims. The sacrifices made by many LDS families to attend the temple at least once in a lifetime, and much more frequently, if opportunities allow, are in many ways similar to the sacrifices made by Muslim pilgrims to Mecca. David Stewart, 2003, A Message of Friendship: Muslims and Latter-day Saints, Pages 3-4

When one considers who the source of these two false religions is, it’s no wonder that Islam and Mormonism would have many striking similarities.

September 5, 2009 by Pilgrim

Introducing A.C.E.

Apologetics

We are unveiling a new feature on DefCon: Answering Common Errors.

This will be a quick reference apologetics page that answers many of the falsehoods and errors levied against the Christian faith.

It features a common error with a link to a previous DefCon post with the answer.

New entries will be added regularly so check back often. If you know of any past posts featured on DefCon that you think should be included in this list, let us know.

You can check out the new A.C.E. page by clicking here, or access it later from the tab above the header of the DefCon blog between About Us and Rules of Engagement.

August 22, 2009 by Pilgrim

Comparing the two witnesses of Jesus Christ.

The following is from 4 Mormon:

BIBLE’S WITNESS OF CHRIST	BOOK OF MORMON’S WITNESS OF CHRIST
Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem. (Matthew 2:1 and Micah 5:2)	Jesus Christ was born at Jerusalem. (Alma 7:10)
Jesus Christ promised: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)	“…there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.” —1 Nephi 13:28
During Jesus’ death, darkness covered the earth for three hours. (Matthew 27:45)	At Jesus’ death, darkness covered the earth for three days. (Helaman 14:20, 27)
Christ’s followers were first called “Christians” at Antioch (after Jesus’ ascension into Heaven). (Acts 11:26)	Christ’s followers were called “Christians” at 73 B.C. (70+ years before Christ was born). (Alma 46:15).
Melchizedek (a picture of Christ in the Old Testament) was “without father.” (Hebrews 7:3)	Melchizedek “did reign under his father.” (Alma 13:18)

August 9, 2009 by Pilgrim

Nada Scriptura?

The world’s false religions and cults have many similarities, and one common thread among them all is their disbelief / distrust / disdain for the Bible.

And among these groups, five stand out as surprising when you consider that they believe themselves to be Christian, and as everybody knows, “Christians” believe the Bible . . . don’t they?

Whether it’s the Jehovah’s Witnesses who discourage individual understanding of the Scriptures . . .

Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah’s visible organization in mind.

The Watchtower / October 1, 1967 / Page 587

. . . even going so far as to employ scare tactics that you’ll become apostate for reading the Bible on your own or in a small group:

They say that it is sufficient to read the bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago…

The Watchtower / August 15, 1981/Pages 28-29

Or whether it’s the Mormons spreading their seeds of doubt . . .

It was apparent that many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled.

Joseph Smith /Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith /Page 10

. . . and blatantly attacking the Word of God:

This congregation heard brother O. Pratt scan the validity of the Bible, and I thought by the time he got through, that you would scarcely think a Bible worth picking up and carrying home, should you find one in the streets.

Brigham Young / Journal of Discourses / Volume 3 Page 116

Or whether it’s the liberal churches who “take the Bible seriously but not literally.”

Or whether it’s the Emergents whose greatest “virtue” is ambiguity, and whose mantra is “did God really say that?” all the while dismissing the importance of the very Bible they claim to believe:

This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is… When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true.

Rob Bell / Velvet Elvis / Pages 67-68

I grew up thinking that we’ve figured out the Bible, that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what most of it means. And yet I feel like life is big again—like life used to be black and white, and now it’s in color.

Kristen Bell (Rob Bell’s wife) / Christianity Today / November 2004

Or whether it’s the Roman Catholic Church who in times past would burn you at the stake for merely possessing the Scriptures in your native tongue, but who now settle for pompously looking down their noses at you for daring to hold God’s inspired, infallible Word above that of their fallible, uninspired popes, priests, and man-made traditions.

So, whether you’re discouraged from reading your Bible, or the Bible is impugned so that you conclude it can’t be trusted, the desired result is always the same: Once you put down the word of God, or place some other “authority” above it, heresy will always follow.

As Gary Gilley aptly said in his book This Little Church Went to Market:

Today, virtually every heresy found in the Christian ranks can be traced back to some form of rejection of the Bible as God’s final authority. It may be pragmatism (which adds success to the Bible); mysticism (which adds experience); tradition (which adds the past): legalism (which adds man’s rules); or philosophy such as psychology (which adds man’s wisdom). The end result is all the same: the Word of God takes a back seat to the inventions and imaginations of men.

Essentially, all these false religions and cults have one goal in mind: To get you to stop trusting the words of the living God and instead, put your trust in their organization. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord and we will trust His word over the lies, rumors, heresies, doubts, and traditions of these false organizations. But what about you? When the question of the authority of Scripture comes up are you going to believe the empty words of false prophets, teachers, popes, and organizations, or the words of God Himself?

For the most part these counterfeit groups would agree that God created the heavens and the earth and that He is the architect of everything from the vastness of the galaxies yet to be discovered by man, to the tiniest microorganisms that are more complex than any supercomputers that we could ever build. And with few exceptions I’m confident that these groups also believe that God sustains His creation and that He’s omnipotent, omniscient, and all powerful.

Yet ironically they do not believe He had or has the power to sustain and preserve His word from generation to generation. How convenient for them that the God of all creation has this one weakness (that their popes, prophets, and programs can help God out with).

God was very clear about the tenacity of His Word: It is forever settled in Heaven (Psalm 119:89), it endures forever (Isaiah 40:8, 1 Peter 1:25), the smallest letter or stroke of the law shall not pass (Matthew 5:18), and Heaven and earth will pass away before His word does (Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:31, Luke 16:17, Luke 21:33).

Yet the false prophets will have you believe that the sovereign God who created and sustains the universe simply could not ensure the preservation of His own Word, but their “new revelation” on the other hand, is accurate and can be trusted in spite of the fact that their doctrines keep being added to, subtracted from, and changing from prophet to prophet, from leader to leader, and from pope to pope.

Bible The Scriptures are for our instruction and to provide hope (Romans 15:4), for teaching (Deuteronomy 11:9, 2 Chronicles 17:9), for equipping Christians for good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and it gives us assurance of salvation (1 John 5:13).

Furthermore, God’s Word is more precious than silver and gold (Psalm 119:72), it’s a lamp, a light, and the way of life (Proverbs 6:23), it’s a lamp unto our feet (Psalm 119:105), it teaches us to fear the Lord (Deuteronomy 17:19), it purifies (Psalm 119:9), it gives understanding to the simple (Psalm 119:130), it teaches us so that we can walk in His paths (Isaiah 2:3), it sanctifies (John 17:17, Ephesians 5:26), it testifies to Jesus Christ (John 5:39), it leads us to Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:24), and it judges our thoughts and attitudes (Hebrews 4:12).

Deconstruction When you consider what God’s Word does, you can see why false religions and cults wish to separate you from it! If they can drive a wedge between you and the word of God, then they will have successfully separated you from the only source by which to measure truth. Then you are easy prey for their new revelations, their other gospels (Galatians 1:6-9), and their false christs.

So, I have three questions:

1. The Bereans were commended for searching the Scriptures to assure that what the Apostle Paul was teaching was accurate (Acts 17:11). Why are these false religions and cults advising you not to take up the Scriptures to see if what they’re teaching is true?

2.The Apostle Paul told us that our struggle is against spiritual powers and forces of wickedness (Ephesians 6:11-12) and in this fight he tells us to put on the armor of God (Ephesians 6:13), in which one of these is the sword of the Spirit–the very word of God. Why would false religions and cults want to disarm you from one of the best offensive and defensive weapons God has provided the Believer and instructed him to wield?

3. Jesus Christ, the Apostles, and the Disciples read the Scriptures and quoted from them regularly. In fact, when Satan tried to thwart Jesus’ mission on earth by twisting Scripture, Jesus quoted from the Scripture each time in rebuttal, effectively disarming the father of lies with the words of truth (Matthew 4:1-11). If the Scriptures were good enough and valuable enough for Jesus Christ and the Apostles, why do the false religions and cults say that they’re not good enough for you?

For all the reasons above it is apparent why false religions and cults reject the Bible and the idea of Sola Scriptura. When those groups claiming to be “Christian” are compared to the Light of the Scriptures they always come up short and their errors, falsehoods, heresies, and soul-damning doctrines of demons are exposed. If they can get you to doubt the Bible, they will quickly fill that void with their own “authority.”

Remember, we were never told that man shall live on the Church, the prophets, or popes, but we are told that man shall live on “every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Deuteronomy 8:3).

So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” – John 8:31-32

________________________________________________________________________________

For more on the Bible see : Bible Reference Notes – The Holy Scriptures

July 3, 2009 by Pilgrim

Mississippi Farm Boy Claims a Revelation from God: LDS Church is Apostate.

Mormonism

Here’s a great question from Jessica over at I Love Mormons:

I have a hypothetical scenario I want to run by you. What would happen if a 14-yr-old LDS kid from Mississippi suddenly showed up on the scene claiming he had received personal revelation from God that the LDS church became apostate after the death of Joseph Smith? This young boy (we’ll call him Joe) claims God revealed to him that the King Follett Discourse never happened the way the history books have it. Rather, after the death of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and others changed many historical documents to try to make it appear like Joseph Smith taught polygamy and polytheism. Joe says Joseph Smith never believed in a plurality of gods; rather, he believed in and taught the Trinity as evidenced by the Book of Mormon. Joe claims Brigham Young edited the D&C and PofGP to add the teachings on polygamy and plurality of gods. Joe starts admonishing LDS that God views the current teachings of the modern-day LDS church as an abomination.

Question: How would you decide whether the 14-yr-old was trustworthy and believable?

June 21, 2009 by Pilgrim

Moroni struck by lightning.

As reported at KSL News:

SOUTH JORDAN — There were some 6,000 to 8,000 lightning strikes in the Salt Lake Valley Saturday, and it appears one of them struck the new Oquirrh Mountain temple.

Witnesses say the lightning blackened the arm, trumpet and face of the Moroni statue that sits on top of the temple’s steeple.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has not confirmed the lightning strike.

And if the LDS organization never confirms the lightning strike, then it never really happened.

In the realm of subjective confirmations, a lightning strike trumps a “burning in the bosom” any day.

HT: Christian Research Council

_____________________________________________________________________

See related: Let the idols hit the floor!

June 14, 2009 by Pilgrim

Africa desperately needs help with combating cults.

I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock . . . – Acts 20:29

Source: Africa Center for Apologetics Research

____________________________________________________________

See related posts:

Charismania unrestrained: Africa’s witch children

The Hell-bound false prophetess Helen Ukpabio of Liberty Gospel Church in Nigeria

Sam and Esther: The least of these

Who they were then, and who they are now

May 14, 2009 by fourpointer

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (Answer 24)

snake eat tail

Notice the little picture above. It is an Oriborus. I really think it symbolizes Mormon theology, because if you share the truth with a Mormon long enough, their theology will start to eat itself.

Tower To Truth Question:

24. If the Adam-God doctrine isn’t true, how come D. & C. 27:11 calls Adam the Ancient of Days which is clearly a title for God in Daniel Chapter 7?

——————————-

FAIR Answer:

The real question should be how do LDS justify their interpretation of Ancient of Days as Adam. LDS are not dependent upon biblical interpretation for a complete understanding of the meaning of this or any other term. Since LDS have a more expanded idea of Adam’s role, it is not surprising that they interpret some verses differently.

The Encyclopedia of Mormonism notes:

For Latter-day Saints, Adam stands as one of the noblest and greatest of all men. Information found in the scriptures and in declarations of latter-day apostles and prophets reveals details about Adam and his important roles in the pre-earth life, in Eden, in mortality, and in his postmortal life. They identify Adam by such names and titles as Michael (D&C 27:11; D&C 29:26), archangel (D&C 88:112), and Ancient of Days (D&C 138:38).

Joseph Smith is one source for this view of Adam:

“‘Ancient of Days’ appears to be his title because he is ‘the first and oldest of all.'”

The critics are also perhaps too confident in their ability to definitively interpret an isolated verse of scripture. This section of Daniel is written in Aramaic, while the rest of the Old Testament is in Hebrew. The phrase translated “Ancient of Days” (attiq yômîn) as one non-LDS source notes, “in reference to God…is unprecedented in the Hebrew texts.” Thus, reading this phrase as referring to God (and, in the critics’ reading, only God) relies on parallels from Canaanite myth and Baal imagery in, for example, the Ugaritic texts. Latter-day Saints are pleased to have a more expanded view through the addition of revelatory insights.

Like many other Christians, the LDS see many parallels between Christ (who is God) and Adam. Christ is even called, on occasion, the “second Adam.” It is thus not surprising that D&C 27:11 associates Adam with a divine title or status when resurrected and exalted—after all, LDS theology anticipates human deification, so God and Adam are not seen as totally “other” or “different” from each other. LDS would have no problem, then, in seeing Adam granted a type of divine title or epithet—they do not see this as necessarily an either/or situation.

This does not mean, however, that Adam and God are the same being, merely that they can ultimately share the same divine nature. Such a reading would be strange to creedal Christians who see God as completely different from His creation. Once again, the theological preconceptions with which we approach the Biblical text affects how we read it.

To learn more:Adam wiki articles
To learn more:Ancient of Days

——————————

My Response:

Now, wait a minute. I thought the Mormon church never taught Adam-God! OK, let’s work through this one point at a time.

The critics are also perhaps too confident in their ability to definitively interpret an isolated verse of scripture. This section of Daniel is written in Aramaic, while the rest of the Old Testament is in Hebrew. The phrase translated “Ancient of Days” (attiq yômîn) as one non-LDS source notes, “in reference to God…is unprecedented in the Hebrew texts.” Thus, reading this phrase as referring to God (and, in the critics’ reading, only God) relies on parallels from Canaanite myth and Baal imagery in, for example, the Ugaritic texts.

Um…yeah. No kidding! Just like interpreting Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2 relies on interpreting history. The reference to Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible (the “one non-LDS souce.” Why don’t they ever tell you what the non-LDS sources are?) is another of those “skimming the surface” type answers FAIR likes to give. Here is the full entry:

Such a term in reference to God, presumably the referent here, is unprecedented in the Hebrew texts, although associations with Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6 have been suggested. The most likely source of the imagery is Canaanite myth since El, the head of the heavenly pantheon, is referred to as the “Father of Years” and often portrayed on a throne with heavenly attendants. The association of El with age generally is also notabble in Canaanite mythology. The context of the phrase, occuring in proximity to “One like a son of man,” which draws clearly on Baal imagery, further supports this association.

Unfortunately, FAIR gets caught up in the details, and gets distracted in trying to deal with Aramaic, so much so that they miss the clear words of the Scriptures.

Daniel 7:9-10–“I watched till thrones were put in place, and the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, its wheels a burning fire; a fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.”

Let’s see. One sat on a throne. Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him, books were opened. These are some of the images we read about in Revelation referring to the Father and Christ. Then skip down to Daniel 7:13-14–

“I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed.”

The Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven. To Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom. His is an everlasting kingdom. If FAIR can show how any of these things do not refer to the Father and the Son, please show me. Next!

Like many other Christians, the LDS see many parallels between Christ (who is God) and Adam. Christ is even called, on occasion, the “second Adam.” It is thus not surprising that D&C 27:11 associates Adam with a divine title or status when resurrected and exalted—after all, LDS theology anticipates human deification, so God and Adam are not seen as totally “other” or “different” from each other. LDS would have no problem, then, in seeing Adam granted a type of divine title or epithet—they do not see this as necessarily an either/or situation.

LDS theology anticipates human deification? Really? Try getting a Mormon to tell you that! Well, it is surprising that the D&C gives a divine title to Adam, since none is ever given to him in the Bible. And basically, FAIR is saying here that Adam is like God. Look at what they said: “God and Adam are not seen as “different” from each other.” Now, I may not always be the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but I do know a thing or two about the English language (although I have never studied Reformed Egyptian). If two things are not “different” from one another, does that not, by default, mean that they are “the same”? So, are they not saying that Adam is LIKE GOD?

So, in a nutshel, since I’m sure by now you feel like something that rhymes with “Tetzel,” is FAIR’s answer to this question………………………yeah, I’m trying to figure it out, too. Once again, they don’t answer the question. They do a little song-and-dance, change the subject, and leave the reader confused enough to believe they know something more than they really do.

April 27, 2009 by Pilgrim

The preaching of the cross is foolishness . . . to Mormons.

The Mormon organization has no problem with Masonic symbols, occultic symbols, and even inverted pentagrams adorning their temples, but they draw the line when it comes to that offensive cross. The two most common ‘excuses’ they provide for their aversion to the cross are:

1). “The cross is a pagan symbol.”

And the pagan symbols in Mormonism are not pagan? Not to mention the pagan practices that go on inside.

2). “We wish to focus on Jesus’ life, not His death.”

Ah, in this one statement Mormons reveal that they have absolutely no idea the true purpose of Christ’s coming to earth nor what it meant for Him to become a propitiation for the believer’s sins. Neither do they understand the fundamentals of the Christian faith or the very Gospel itself. For the Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and it is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes. How can you possibly “focus on His life” at the exclusion of His death . . . the very reason He came to earth (Mark 10:45)?

The preaching of the cross is a stumbling block to the Jew and foolishness to the Gentile (1 Corinthians 1:23) but it appears to be both to the Mormon.

Mormons not only have an aversion to the symbol of the cross like a vampire to a crucifix, but Mormons have an aversion to what the cross represents. Just like Satan who desires nothing more than to avert the sinner’s gaze away from the redemptive work accomplished by Jesus on the cross, Mormons attempt to direct the attention of their followers away from the redemptive work accomplished by Jesus on the cross as well. For example:

In the Garden of Gethsemane, Christ took upon himself the sins of all mankind.

Gospel Principles

Page 70

1997

The night preceding His crucifixion, Jesus Christ . . . . took upon Himself the burden of the sins of mankind from Adam to the end of the world.

Milton R. Hunter

The Gospel Through The Ages

Page 182

1945

Jesus, therefore, preceding crucifixion, had His last great struggle, while in mortality, with Satan and with death and came forth victorious.

Milton R. Hunter

The Gospel Through The Ages

Page 183

1945

If you’re believing in a “savior” that bore your sins in the Garden of Gethsemane, then you’re believing in one of the many false Christs that the True Christ warned us about, and you are still dead in your sins and will face the righteous, holy, and eternal wrath of God when you die.

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins (Hebrews 9:22), but Mormonism would have you believe that the Garden of Gethsemane was where Jesus bore our sins and that His ‘sweating’ (not ‘shedding’) of blood had something to do with our redemption. The context of ‘shedding of blood’ is not an expelling of some blood in your sweat, but that of death. I am in no way diminishing the suffering of Christ in the Garden, but it was not the place where He atoned for our sins.

The foreshadow of Christ throughout the Old Testament was of the death (shedding of blood) of a worthy substitute (e.g. the animals killed to ‘cover’ Adam and Eve’s nakedness, the ram in the thicket in place of Isaac on the alter, the blood of the lamb on the doorposts in Egypt, etc.). All of these required the death of an animal, not merely the loss of a little of its blood.

If this corrupt doctrine of LDS were true, then the Mormon “Jesus” could have essentially atoned for the sins of mankind the first time He scraped His knee playing as a child, or the first time He cut His hand while working as a carpenter.

Although nowhere in Scripture can even the idea be found that Christ paid for our sins in the Garden of Gethsemane, this doesn’t stop Mormonism from teaching this heresy.

But what saith the Scripture?

And He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. – 1 Peter 2:24

But Mormonism is not content with diverting your attention away from the finished work of Christ on the cross; they also blasphemously attack the very efficacy of the sacrifice of our precious Savior!

Are you aware that there are certain sins that a man may commit for which the atoning blood of Christ does no avail? Do you not know, too, that this doctrine is taught in the Book of Mormon?

Joseph Fielding Smith

Doctrines of Salvation

Volume 1 Page 133

Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their own blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine and taught in all the standard works of the Church.

Joseph Fielding Smith

Doctrines of Salvation

Volume 1 Page 135

But under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins. Murder, for instance, is one of these sins; hence we find the Lord commanding capital punishment.

Bruce R. McConkie

Mormon Doctrine

Page 92

1966 Edition

We must believe that this same Jesus was crucified for the sins of the world, that is for the original sin, not the actual individual transgressions of the people; not but that the blood of Christ will cleanse from all sin, all who are disposed to act their part by repentance, and faith in his name. But the original sin was atoned for by the death of Christ, although its effects we still see in the diseases, tempers and every species of wickedness with which the human family is afflicted.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 13 Page 143

1869

It will be necessary here to make a few observations on the doctrine set forth in the above quotation, and it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e., the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus] was offered up, and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in [the] future: but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the priesthood, or with the Prophets.

Joseph Smith

History of the Church

Volume 4 Page 211

It is not to be understood that the law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the Prophets; but those things which existed prior to Moses’ day, namely, sacrifice, will be continued. It may be asked by some, what necessity for sacrifice, since the Great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which, if repentance, baptism, and faith existed prior to the days of Christ, what necessity for them since that time?

Joseph Smith

History of the Church

Volume 4 Page 212

Christ did his part to atone for our sins. To make his atonement fully effective in our lives, we must strive to obey him and repent of our sins.

Gospel Principles

Page 75

1997

Christ’s atonement makes it possible to be saved from sin if we do our part.

Gospel Principles

Page 75

1997

It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Page 54

1856

There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world. I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is a strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not destroy them.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Page 53

1856

I do know that there are sins committed, of such a nature that if the people did under the doctrine of salvation, they would tremble because of their situation. And furthermore, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Pages 53-54

1856

No matter how current LDS apologists try to spin it, the fact is they do not believe that Christ’s sacrifice (in the Garden of Gethsemane or on the cross) was sufficient to cleanse you from all of your sins. They continue to believe the blasphemous doctrine that you must still do something on your behalf to merit God’s favor. Former LDS prophets have even gone so far as to teach that the shedding of your own blood is required for remission of sins. This is known as the Doctrine of Blood Atonement and is one of the many LDS doctrines that modern-day Mormons have tried desperately to distance themselves from (you can find out more about this utterly Satanic doctrine here and here).

However, one only needs to look as far as Holy Scripture to see the error and folly of this false gospel of Mormonism. The same God who can redeem Israel from all her iniquities (Psalm 130:8) can surely redeem sinners from all of their iniquities. In spite of Mormonism’s claim that there are “some sins” that men can commit that the blood of Christ cannot atone for, the inspired Word of God tells us the exact opposite:

But if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. – 1 John 1:7

Jesus gave Himself to redeem us from every lawless deed (Titus 2:14) as we are justified and saved from the wrath of God by His blood (Romans 5:9). Reconciliation was accomplished by the shedding of Christ’s blood on the cross (Colossians 1:20) and we are redeemed not by perishable things, but by the precious blood of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:18-19).

In spite of what the false teachers of LDS would have you believe, Christ’s sacrifice was not only sufficient to put away sin (Hebrews 9:26) and obtain eternal redemption through His blood (Hebrews 9:11-12), but it was done once and for all (Hebrews 7:26-27).

So when a Mormon comes to you bringing their long laundry list of things you must do to be saved, remember that Jesus paid the debt, it was sufficient, it is finished, and “there is no longer any offering for sin” (Hebrews 10:10-18)!

Jesus came in order to take away sins (1 John 3:5) and yet Mormons say He did not accomplish this. Who are you going to believe? A false organization led by false prophets, rife with false prophecies all pointing to a false “Jesus” and a false “gospel,” or the holy and inspired Word of God that has stood the test of time?

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. – 1 Corinthians 1:18

April 18, 2009 by Pilgrim

Another example of Mormons “not attacking” another religion.

Anyone who tries sharing the true gospel of Jesus Christ with a Mormon will eventually (if they haven’t already) run into the tried and true LDS tactic of pulling the victim card. They’ll say, “We have never attacked anyone’s religion, why are you attacking us?”

Well, not only has this claim by Mormons been proven to be an outright lie (see the post What Mormons Really Believe About Christians), but here’s a video showing just how sensitive to other people’s faith some of them are, and with some questionable racial overtones too.

April 16, 2009 by Pilgrim

Ten more (very) quick questions for Mormons.

(Also for JWs)

April 12, 2009 by Pilgrim

Quorum of the Twelve Apostates.

Sometimes you can find the truth about Mormonism in the most unlikeliest of places.

quorum-of-the-twelve-apostates

HT: What Mormons Don’t Tell

Continue reading →

April 2, 2009 by Pilgrim

Dear Mormon: Which version of the first vision do you believe?

Here’s a quick time-line of how the conflicting accounts of Joseph Smith’s first vision(s) overlapped.

1820 – 1838 The first vision consisted of angels only.

1842 The introduction of the “God the Father and Jesus the Son” version of the first vision.

1838 – 1890 The first account of “angels only” continued to linger on in spite of the new 1842 version.

1890 – Present The “God the Father and Jesus the Son” version is the only one accepted (and most Mormons today don’t even know about the whole “angels only” version).

To view a downloadable, easy to read, superbly detailed, full-color pamphlet on the various versions of the first vision click this link here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

joseph-smiths-vision

I received the first visitation of Angels which was when I was about 14 years old.

Joseph Smith

Joseph Smith’s Diary 1835-1836

An American Prophet’s Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith

Page 59

It commenced by an angel of God flying through the midst of heaven and visiting a young man named Joseph Smith, in the year 1827.

Wilford Woodruff

Journal of Discourses

Volume 13 Page 324

1869

He sought the Lord by day and by night, and was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel.When this personage appeared to him, one of his first inquiries was: “Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?”

George A. Smith

Journal of Discourses

Volume 13 Page 78

1869

Just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it.The answer was that none of them are right.What, none of them?No.We will not stop to argue that question; the angel merely told him to join none of them that none of them were right.

John Taylor

Journal of Discourses

Volume 20 Page 167

1879

Some one may say, “If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour [sic] come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?”Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else.

Orson Hyde

Journal of Discourses

Volume 6 Page 335

1854

How did this state of things called Mormonism originate?We read that an angel came down and revealed himself to Joseph Smith and manifested unto him in vision the true position of the world in a religious point of view.He was surrounded with light and glory while the heavenly messenger communicated these things unto him, after a series of visitations and communications from the Apostle Peter and others who held the authority of the holy Priesthood, not only on the earth formerly but in the heavens afterwards.

John Taylor

Journal of Discourses

Volume 10 Page 127

1863

Upon the reality and truth of this vision rests the validity of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. – Gordon B. Hinckley

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

first-vision

See also: This video on the first vision.

March 23, 2009 by Pilgrim

Utah’s dirty little secret.

Mormonism’s been playing the shell game; hiding many of their beliefs from the public eye since its very inception, including the sins of their prophets. And now there’s yet another secret sin permeating among the Mormon-saturated state of Utah.

You see, anytime we challenge Mormonism’s false doctrines, inevitably some adherent to LDS comes in and–ignoring the facts–repeats the mantra referring to how good of a people they are and thus, this “proves” they’re the only true church.

They love to misuse Jesus’ teaching that “you will know them by their fruit” when applying it to themselves because they don’t drink, smoke, or cuss. However, those who’ve studied Mormonism know very well that this false religion is replete with the evil sins of deception, lies, wickedness, adultery, polygamy, and murder. But these LDS apologists always fail/refuse to consider these wicked fruits of LDS: “Pay no attention to that, look only at the good things we do.”

So when I saw this article exposing Utah’s addiction to pornography, I realized this is just another decomposing, rotting, spot of mold festering just below the surface of the facade of “perfect” Mormon fruit.

After controlling for differences in broadband internet access between states – online porn tends to be a bandwidth hog – and adjusting for population, he found a relatively small difference between states with the most adult purchases and those with the fewest. The biggest consumer, Utah, averaged 5.47 adult content subscriptions per 1000 home broadband users; Montana bought the least with 1.92 per 1000. “The differences here are not so stark,” Edelman says.

February 21, 2009 by Pilgrim

Mormon blasphemy illustrated.

The following picture is found on page 126 of the 1972 LDS Family Home Evening Manual to describe to Mormon children “how Jesus was the only begotten Son of God.”

Utter blasphemy!

For more information check out: