130 replies to this topic

[SOAP]

I'm guessing baptist, Miatch.

[Korhend]

completely first. It's been addressed but not in the depth I'd like. How do you Catholics (and mormons, if there's any left in this flame fest) believe a person gets to heaven? I've always been told that the Catholics teach that one must do believe in God AND do good works in order to get into heaven. In my church (a small independent Baptist church) we say that in order tog et into heaven, the only thing necessary is to repent of your sins and believe that Jesus died and was ressurrected. If one is serious about their faith, then once they're saved, then they'll want to follow Jesus and do good works, and avoid sinning, etc.

As I understand it, works alone can save you. If you follow the morals of god even without following god himself, there is a place in heaven for you.

[Vazor]

It's not so much that we believe works will get you into heaven...it's that faith and works are inseperably connected. If you're not doing good works, then you clearly don't have faith in Jesus, as he told us to go and do good for others. So, no, works do not get you into heaven, faith does; but, after all, "faith without works is dead" (James 2:20). If one really had faith in Christ, he would do good deeds. But it is in the end the faith that results in salvation; works are merely the greatest means by which that faith is expressed.

[Flint]

kudos to the people who stayed on the topic of polygamy, like kazi asked in the original post. hooked on phonics, any one?

So why is it illegal? It can't be because of sex with more than one person (which is quite a skin-deep reason for it being outlawed anyway)? I know it's illegal in the states, as it is illegal here too, apparently. But why? What were the reasons they stated?

One has to look beyond the religious and morality aspects of it. Marriage is also a legally binding contract. Taxes, income, benefits, custodies, wills, etc are all affected by whether a couple is officially married or not (on paper, not by the church). If a man has multiple wives... this system gets confusing and complicated, and possibly moot.

At least that's what I think.

[Alakhriveion]

kudos to the people who stayed on the topic of polygamy, like kazi asked in the original post. hooked on phonics, any one?
One has to look beyond the religious and morality aspects of it. Marriage is also a legally binding contract. Taxes, income, benefits, custodies, wills, etc are all affected by whether a couple is officially married or not (on paper, not by the church). If a man has multiple wives... this system gets confusing and complicated, and possibly moot.

At least that's what I think.

Well, traditionally, the firstborn son inherits everything and divorce is a crime. We figured out how to modernize single-wife marrige, multiple wives couldn't be that much more complicated.

[Reflectionist]

http://www.rapidnet....ults/mormon.htm

[Goose]

After reading that long webpage, I'm still convinced that you should ask somebody who is a mormon, (Delphi) rather than what could be an EXTREMLY biased web page.

All that page did was give one point of view, and not talk about the people. IF they had gone and talked to modern day mormons, and heard what they had to say, then I would give it more of a chance, but as it is.


ITS COMPLETE CRAP!

[Nevermind]

Yeah, it's really pointless trying to prove a point by using a website about Mormons up against....well......a Mormon...


This is what you call Primary sources, Secondary sources, and crap sources...

[Oberon Storm]

I have issues with religious groups like Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, and SDA's. Plates that only one guy and a handful of others saw, telling your followers the world will end in 1975 then not taking responsibility for you statements, and a plagiarist prophet. Though adimittedly one is a matter of faith not unlike some other things Christians believe. Hell, I have issues with just about any organised religion. But going out of your way to destroy someones faith based on issues of faith is a tad extreme. Sure I'll criticize the 1975 thing and the plagiarism issue, but if people still want to follow those religions then so be it. If they want to follow a guy and his plates then so be it. As far as I know they all believe in the Jesus stuff. I see no reason why someone should want to debunk them all as cults.

Edited by Chief Fire Storm, 31 May 2006 - 05:50 AM.

[Reflectionist]

Well, then, I guess there's no debate here if you believe that quotes from the creator of a religion are worthless in the debate.

You just go on believing what you believe.

[Goose]

Your quotes could be useful, if not taken in the wrong context. My problem is with the fact that you ignore an actual Mormons point of view.

[Reflectionist]

And Joseph Smith was a Catholic?
What, was Brigham Young a Muslim?

[Goose]

The point is, You found an incredibly biased page, quoted the address, added nothign on to it of your own, and the page was biased. I could write something like that about antying, by misquoting what the authors actually meant. I could go about taking posts of yours and making it sound like your a duck, it wouldn't be hard.

If you can find a source that isn't as biased as that, then the argument can continue.

[Delphi]

What? So a Catholic can't come to a Mormon's defence? I've ended up defending Catholics IRL more often than I defend my own religion because I respect them. They are generally very giving and kind people. My church actually gives all donations recieved for disaster victims like those of Hurricane Katrina to the Catholic church because they have a very good system set up already. When Pope John Paul died it was during our conference (international televised event) and the President of our church asked that we pay our respects to a great man and leader of a great church.

I think it's only natural for us to come to each other's defences. I've defended other religions, even those of non-Christian faiths. I see no point in shoving down someone else's religion and telling them that they're going to go to Hell. Most people that follow their religion as it's supposed to be followed are very good people. Even those that don't have a religion are very good people if they follow a decent moral code. If they're good people, why should I condem them?

Obviously, though, I'm not going to change your mind. But I will say that if you keep attacking any religion different from yours, you're gonna have a lot of people pissed off at you as you go through life.

[Reflectionist]

Direct quotes can not be biased. Thanks for playing.

Truth hurts. Get over it.

I didn't say anything about everyone going to Hell. Maybe I'm going to hell. See you there then. At least I'm doing what I believe is right.

[Selena]

Direct quotes can not be biased.

Direct quotes shown entirely out of context? I'd like to see the actual Book of Mormon before rushing off to a site obviously opposed to the religion for my 'answers.' Or, you know, ask an actual Mormon. One of which is right here, yet you don't seem keen on asking her any questions anymore.

But at least you don't suffer from a lack of confidence.

But I will say that if you keep attacking any religion different from yours, you're gonna have a lot of people pissed off at you as you go through life.

Ditto. Gotta say. Guys like you? The reason I wonder why Christianity is as popular as it is. You've managed to piss off people from several different sects of the religion in this thread alone. Congrats!

[Reflectionist]

How could they be taken out of context?

That's exactly what they said!!!!

The quotes are cited, you know... in case you feel you want to find a context that isn't blasphemous. Or goes directly against canon Scripture.

Edited by Reflectionist, 01 June 2006 - 09:44 PM.

[Delphi]

FYI, there's already one false stat on the page in the first sentence. It's only 10%, but if they can't get a simple census fact right it's hard to believe the rest of it.

"Approximately 60% of state residents are adherents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), which represent less than 50% of the population in urban areas and over 90% in rural areas." Wikipedia

Boys aren't expected for required to go on missions. It is a personal choice. We ENCOURAGE them to go, but they are not REQUIERED.

"Most people assume Mormon temples are places of worship. This is not true. Only secret, occult rituals for the living and the dead are performed there, and Mormons think they must perform them to have eternal life. It is tragic that over eleven million Mormons think they need secret handshakes, oaths, incantations, and rituals, which originated in occultic Scottish Rite Freemasonry, in order to be with God in heaven! (In the final years of Joseph Smith Jr.'s life, he became a "worshipful master" in the Masonic Lodge.)"

Untrue. The temple IS a place of worship. I've been there many times to do baptisms and some people just like to go to worship or meditate. I knokw a lot of people who will take time out of their day one or twice a month to just go and be in the temple to worship, pray, whatever.

Quoted from scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants: "Establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God." (Doctrine and Covenants 1835 VII:36, LDS 88:119, RLDS 85:36b)

We also believe that all men (and women, children, its, whatever since you're so nitpicky) will acheive immortality regardless of what they did in this life. That isn't to say that all men will acheive the same amount of glory. That is based on faith and works and, yes, certain ordances. But I do not believe in a traditional Hell. Even the "lowest" glory is equivelent to the Garden of Eden. That's where the "bad" people go.

But the handshake is NOT what gives you more glory. It is SYMBOLISM of a promise made to God. Much like the Sacrament is symbolism.

We don't believe in plural Gods. We believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. They are three seperate beings but they work together as one. Same as a lot of Christian religions.

I'm not going to expound any more on this considering what they're quoting from isn't even scripture and the entire article makes me laugh. The apostles and prophets are HUMAN. Meaning they make mistakes. They sin like the rest of us. They are fallable and some of the books they write aren't accurate. But they aren't scripture. But when an apostle or prophet speaks over the pulpit in conference or gives a proclamation to the chuch, THAT is scripture. Because we believe that was inspired by God.

So for future reference if it's not from the Bible (KJV most of the time but we do accept other translations), Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, or a CONFERENCE talk, it is not offical scripture and is subject to, yes I will admit it, being false or illinformed or subject to assumptions made by the author.

[Nevermind]

"Only secret, occult rituals..." I'm sorry, that's where I stopped taking it seriously.


Ok I didn't actually START taking it seriously, but you know what I mean...

[Vazor]

Honestly, and I've said this before, Ref, stop making assumptions about other religions based on the limited (and clearly biased) information you've seen. I actually tend to respect Mormons more than most other sects (not necessarily for their particular beliefs, but more because they as a whole are more evangelical than most other sects, something all Christians should strive to do). Secret, occult rituals? Give me a break.

Attacking and perpetuating obvious lies about other religions is not very Christian, Reflectionist. It's one thing to peacefully state your beliefs, or to ask questions to people who are actually part of the group in question, but what you're doing is both arrogant and ignorant. You constantly ignore the responses of the people whom you accuse, and that's very disrespectful.

[Reflectionist]

Well, when what I've been taught is that only the elected priests know what they believe, you don't expect me to take a common mormon's word for it do you?

You people are mean.

This is what I was brought up to believe, and I'M the asshole?

Please.

Edited by Reflectionist, 02 June 2006 - 08:58 PM.

[Selena]

Yeah, poor pitiful you, going around, accusing other religions of practicing the occult. Life's just a travesty!


Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go have a non-believer heathen rape orgy, Delphi and the Scientologists are going to worship Xenu, apparently, while Korhend and Vazor are gonna go get drunk off wine and eat Jesus cookies. Or so you'd apparently like to believe.


Difference between believing in something and accusing other religions of being alien worshipping, occult practicing fools.


...Though aliens are pretty cool. I mean.... aliens, man.

[Nevermind]

Well, when what I've been taught is that only the elected priests know what they believe, you don't expect me to take a common mormon's word for it do you?

You people are mean.

This is what I was brought up to believe, and I'M the asshole?

Please.

Wait wait wait......you were TAUGHT that only the elected priests knew what they really believed in...obviously by someone in your own church or at least NOT a Mormon......and you take this person's word over someone who is actually part of the religion in discussion.......and.....you cannot see....how it is biased?

WTF?

Does not compute.

[SOAP]

In all fairness, you guys talk about Re being biased but wouldn't Delphi be just as bias? Not saying that's she's wrong at all or being purposely misleading (I have a few mormon friends too and I'd defend their faith to the death if I had to) but if she believes in faith it's no surprise she'd want to defend it wrong or right. Anyone of ANY faith would do the same. Unbias would a totally objective party that neither holds malice towards a particular faith nor has personal ties with the religion (that includes people who'd defend Mormon faith for the simple fact their friends/loved ones are Mormon). Feelings on both sides could just as easily cloud the actual truth to be honest.

[Oberon Storm]

It isn't just bias though. It's credibility.

[Vazor]

SOAP, you completely misunderstood the issue. Of course you're going to be biased in favor of something you belong to or are connected to. That doesn't mean you have to be biased against others. There is a major difference between the two.

[SOAP]

And you guys missed my point. What I'm saying is even though they're both bias you guys automatically side with Delphi even though her side is no less objective than Re's. She can be more credible but that doesn't mean she's completely truthful about what she knows. But such a thing would be below Delphi of course. My point is you can't just pick sides like that because both sides are just as likely to say whatever it takes to make you believe the other person is wrong. And of course you people will always agree with the defendant and block out whatever the accuser has to say. That right there is being bias against someone.

[Selena]

I won't block out what he says if it sounds like a logical, fact based argument. But alas, not much of it has. Mainly based on rumors and hearsay.

While we obviously might not get the straight, unbiased story from either side here, it's safe to say that Delphi knows more about her own religion that someone else, yes? Even with the bias she may have towards it. You don't ask a Muslim about Buddhism, correct?


Or we could assume Delphi's just lying, and that she really DOES practice the occult and worship aliens. But then ultraparanoia was never my forte.

Edited by Selena, 03 June 2006 - 05:02 PM.

[SOAP]

Yeah I know that. And in this situation I'd go with Delphi hands down. Yes if you want to know about a religion it's better to ask someone who's actually in it, but also do you own research too. It's all to easy to just take someone's word for it and leave it at that.

You should be careful too. It's also easy to block someone out just because they sound like a total asshole. At some point, you gotta separate the message from the messenger sometimes.

[Delphi]

Or we could assume Delphi's just lying, and that she really DOES practice the occult and worship aliens.

Curse you Lena! You've discovered our true motives! Now I must pray for alien beams to kill you until you die! RAWR!!!

.
..
...


What? I had to say something. XD

And I understand what SOAP is meaning by the bias thing. There's really no such thing as a neutral point of view after all.