by inquirer 21 Replies latest jw friends
That was so effed up! I thought the sound effects were so funny.. the erie creepiness towards the end was too much. The animation looked a lot like parts of the anti-witness video "Witnesses of Jehovah". Could be done by the same guys.
I'd like to see that animation of Jehovah getting bears to maul to death the children who made fun of Elisha's baldness.
GBL
You should watch the rest of the video that comes with it its hilarious. While you can disagree all you like I'm LDS and they made several fundamental errors that twist things. I'm presuming you are all a bit smarter than actually thinking that's all correct. Let me point out some obvious (to me) points of idiocy. There is a big difference between church leaders writing a personal opinion and church doctrine
We do not teach that Jospeh Smith was better than Jesus.
We do not teach that the black race were the 'fence sitters' in heaven.
We don't teach that Jesus was married or that God had sex with Mary.
The doctrine of proving yourself to God still relies 100% on grace (a point completely missed.)
Constant references to the 'Mormon Jesus' are just bonkers.
Satan doesn't have horns.
Men have polygamous wives in heaven.
God and A wife came to earth as Adam and Eve.
Indians are Jews - not at all - one tiny set of ancestors where Josephites fleeing Jerusalem.
They pointed out several things as though they were weird but actually are fairly normal:
1- War in Heaven.
2- God is our Father.
3- We are His children.
4- We are created spiritually before we are created physically.
5- There is a purpose to life and that we continue.
6- Jesus visited other people than the Jews.
7- God talks through prophets.
8- God lives somewhere.
Some valid points of difference they made:
Book of Mormon
God's visit to Americas
Temple Rites
Modern Day Prophets
Existence before earth life
I thought the idea of eternal sex was actually quite a good selling point! If there is any concept of heaven do Christians teach that we won't have sex anymore..? Just for the record their may be 'eternal' walking around, talking, eating, wearing of clothes etc.. shock horror.
EF just a final point - the LDS do not break up families - I have been in leadership for 15 years now and every single training and communique I ever see reinforces over and over again the primacy of the family and the importance of preserving it - we have no principle of shunning and actually counsel the sometimes over zealous missionaries to baptise individuals with the acceptance of the family (doesn't always work mind you). Sometimes individuals may decide to join the church and that causes rifts at home but the church (speaking of it as a whole as opposed to individuals) does not split families up.
And finally what was up with God in a terry nappy - surely they'd use a disposable!!!?
That video was quite a scream... Seeing Elohim in a nappy was hilarious!! (does Elohim = Jehovah in LDS belief ??)... and "Endless celestial sex"?... i'm converting right away...
Although i have never been an LDS i do agree with Q that Mormons do seem to put great emphasis on the family as opposed to how the WTS policies tear families apart. But, just as Q said that "individuals may decide to join the church which may cause rifts at home but the church itself does not split families up", JWs say exactly the same thing. JWs are far worse though in my opinion (probably just because i have first hand experience of them). I think references to the 'Mormon Jesus' are as accurate as references to a 'Watchtower Jesus' or a 'Catholic Jesus'... each cult has its own view of Jesus... he is the human manifestation of God in Catholicism, he is the Archangel Michael in Watchtowerism and he is an eternal spirit in heaven who came to earth and had three wives in Mormonism... i am of the opinion that none of these versions of Jesus are correct and that Jesus' words became twisted long before even the time of the "Apostle Paul".
( The Gospel writers felt so oppressed by the organised religion of the day that they found Jesus' eloquence in expressing comforting human truths, quite refreshing. They wanted to believe that Jesus was even more special than he was, they wanted to believe that he was the Messiah, so they added stories of his miraculous birth and his ressurection and miracles and what not. If you read the NT, the further and further you get into it, you can just see the process of adding layer upon layer of doctrine to Jesus' simple human words of "have love in your hearts". The process of adding more and more rules and loopholes and doctrine to a simple message of freedom and respect are brilliantly allegorised in Geaorge Orwell's "Animal Farm".) What i strongly disrespect, among many other things about the Mormons, is their past idea of blacks being inferior to whites or having some kind of curse, which they presently try to cover up. The thing is, i read the whole book of Mormon years ago (actually in order to argue with a Mormon about the truth of the Watchtower ). The only reference to racism i found was when 2 Nephi 30:6 talked about the "white/fair and delightsome race". This could easily be interpreted as the innocent phrase "pure and delightful people" or something else to that effect... but the LDS still held the idea up until the 1960s. Most of the racism is found in their other documents and publications which i haven't read. It seems that the WTS is not the only cult that can take a holy book and exaggerate parts, ignore others, interpret the whole thing in a biased way, then turn around and dare to call it "spiritual food"...
Q... I respectfully disagree with you about broken families. The mormon church DOES have shunning and is used as a weapon just as the Dub's do. Maybe it's not in their "official" policy but will seek confirmation later today. Which sect of Mormonism do you belong to? Remember my good friend runs an Ex-Mormon website...very similar to this one, and has written 2 books on the history of Mormonism. So I've seen my share of painful, heart wrenching stories.
I'm mainstream Mormon - the one with the 12 million members.
I remember something one of our prophets said about the coloured people (apologies if that's not pc :) and Priesthood scenario which in a nutshell he said it should have happened along time ago (priesthood for all).
Its definately something I struggled with for a long time (being born in Africa I do find myself somewhat biased) and I was looking for some understanding of why the Priesthood was not extended to all men in the church. This is the answer I received (this came after a lot of prayer and study - up to you whether you agree with me on its source..)
The role of the Priesthood of God is to act as the ultimate servant NOT the as master. The time was when only the leadership of Israel and the Levites held the priesthood within Israel(and the world - I won't bring LDS scriptures into this to show exceptions). The priesthood is extended to other races and peoples only when the current holder of it has been humbled and learnt to serve. Therefore the reason why the Israelites didn't have the higher priesthood was because of the Mt Sinai fiasco (restricted to a lesser priesthood) causing damage to themselves and also those who could have been served over history. Jesus came and fulfilled the law and restored the higher law and priesthood (he organised a structure that had elders etc.. and was spirit based rather than performance based.) OK this is the contentious bit and I fully understand if you all disagree with me. The priesthood authority was lost through apostacy so once again most of the races of the earth lost the chance of the priesthood because those who had it couldn't understand it was to serve not rule others. Finally in the restoration the authority has been restored one last time and it is because of the LDS members failure to be humble sooner that this priesthood wasn't extended sooner to all men (even now there are loads of places that don't have lds missionaries (yea I hear that audible sigh of relief all round:) so in a way we are still failing the majority of people in at least offering them the Priesthood. I think initially the priesthood was not extended because of a mixture of the slave issue and prevailing feelings at the time (the church wasn't created in an antiseptic bubble - many people had feelings of superiority over the indians and other non european cultures - Britain led the way in overcoming slavery but we struggled with it a lot during the early part of this centuary.)
EF - there really is no official policy on shunning I'm a fairly up front and honest bloke - where there has been shunning it is because of idiots like me (see a way earlier post of mine) rather than a church policy. If 'that' idiot is a bishop then the damage he causes is horrendous.
OK I'm going to break one of my self imposed rules - not to bloat this site with shed loads of LDS bumf (I only do ity bits normally) that is so much religious spam to you all - its just to clarify the official position regarding families and the LDS church - anyway EF I'm sure you'll find stuff far more useful for any ire you might want to direct;)
“We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
“All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
“In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.
“The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
“We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.
“Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. ‘Children are an heritage of the Lord’ (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.
“The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.
“We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society” (Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102).
and before anyone goes on about headship principles....
(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 121:39 - 42)
39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—
Q...as I've mentioned I've known some first hand shunning instances...hence why I said it. There seems to be many cases of it. I also pulled up an encyclopedia and looked it up.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons)
Mormons have a lay ministry. Most people in the congregation are called up to serve in some capacity. This includes the Bishop, the main ecclesiastical authority. Face to face "interviews" with the Bishop include frank discussions about the law of chastity, being honest in your dealings with your fellow man, support of the church authorities, non association with splinter groups or anti Mormon organizations. Violations can result in punishments ranging from not taking the sacrament (communion) to a Bishop's Court where the individual usually meets with the Bishop and his first and second councilors. These men determine if the individual should be punished or not with revocation of Temple Recommends and disfellowship. If the offense is serious enough (usually violations involving sex, violence of some form of criminal offense) the court will be administer by the High Council and led by the Stake President.
The social ramifications of these punishments are intense, especially in smaller, Mormon dominated communities. Once someone is viewed as "having lost the Spirit", they are avoided except for occasional "fellowshipping" to encourage the individual to "get their life in order and return to the fold." However, if the individual begins to question the authority of the church, or the theology, "active" Mormons will avoid them, and view them as being led about by the devil.
what encyclopaedia is that? I think if someone goes apostate (actually attacking the church in public) then people wouldn't be encouraged to spend time debating the church with them. I agree with the point about small communities where living in each others pocket could get difficult BUT that would happen for most highly committed organisations - it still isn't church policy - quite the opposite - that's why every month I have a list of members of the church - active and less active to go and visit and hang out with. Disfellowshipment is normally a very discrete affair and very very few people are told about it - of course there are always exceptions where someone has a runaway gob bur again that is their fault not the church. For the record I have never sat in on any disciplinary councils - there aren't very many.
The social ramifications of these punishments are intense, especially in smaller, Mormon dominated communities. Once someone is viewed as "having lost the Spirit", they are avoided except for occasional "fellowshipping" to encourage the individual to "get their life in order and return to the fold." However, if the individual begins to question the authority of the church, or the theology, "active" Mormons will avoid them, and view them as being led about by the devil.
Perhaps they're just reading from a 'different tophat' so to speak.
I love Star Trek!
