Serg

Harsh dont you think? Yet i consider good that people get to know this. Are'nt we in the so called "open forums"? Then if there I cant at all post things like these ,then where? in another forum?LOL. Easy Jason, easy pa'l regards,

That "edited" post is only edited because after finishing it I added "That change and good things in my life thanks to this gospel is what I am going to testify of, none else." Not because I changed anything at all. Again, if you consider vacillation the fact that i said in another post to Ray(as I recall), that "why would I teach the message of a Church so false", etc... and now I say that i can reconcile negative facts with faith, well, it's call growing. At least in a profound matter, it is very tough for me to leave this church, and to satisfy your curiosity I tell you; It's been very difficult for me to still believe in the ministry of Joseph Smith(so much covered by negative facts) while at the same time, accepting the changes(good ones) and great truths that have i received since I have been a part of the Church...One of my most important desires is to SERVE the Lord, be it on a mission or another ministry, in fact, by the time i was almost to step out i became VERY interested with the evangelistic ministry, and i feel in my heart the need and the rejoice of preaching. That is it. That i spoke with "harsh" tones is a matter of conduct, of reactions and most of all of my perception of many of lds people here. That i try to make the case against Smith in TRUE events(that ARE negative), in front of a very biased community of blind faith, is normal, and is healthy, I base my faith both on reason and heart, not only one. Most peope here are unbalanced in that respect, though they may sound coherent and thoughtful about it Enough? PD(Long time no see "Paul"! we got a pending topic ) Regards, I had the same thought; I was thinking of his reference to Joseph Smith as a "filthy liar," among other things... The COMPLETE quote about that would be "filthy liar at least in that[poligamy] respect". So yes, most lds scholars say so, he lied. Is true, but it doesnt have to hurt your testimony brother, nor was it intended for such a thing HUH? Don't tell me that this is really Serg writing this! There is no way this is Serg. No grammatical errors, no spelling errors, no mixing up of sentences. Or is he quoting someone else??? If this is Serg, then he is a Dr Jeykell/ Mr. Hyde!!! Are you serious MrsS, because it sure looks like Serg to me. Don't want to offend but I bolded Serg's errors. M. Thank you maureen, you can be so handy when it comes to the progress of someone

It seems odd to me that you would serve a mission with your opinions on Joseph Smith. Isnt one of the main purposes of a mission is to convince none believers that he is a prophet, the restoration, etc. If you have such disbelief in some of these areas why go out and preach it unto others? I have come to harmonize the defects of his character with the fruits of his ministry, and they are not so widely adverse at all. When you reffer to "my views" on Joseph Smith to the FACTS of his life(negative ones) that I have come to analize or expose here, that does not prove that I don't believe in him, or at least, that I could never believe in him, but that are there and are not comfortable. Yes, I almost stepped(well, certainly did) on unbelief, but i think i can rely on God's testimony and the good things that have come into my life since i accepted this gospel. However odd that may seem, is due to my lack of blind faith and my actual effort to give a fight for this faith. That change and good things in my life thanks to this gospel is what I am going to testify of, none else. Hope that does it for you, Regards,

No speculation needed. 3 Nephi 28:38-40 explains that the three disciples were translated. The change upon their bodies wasn't equal to the glory of the resurrection (v.39), but it was sufficient to prevent them from dying. They still minister on the Earth to this day (maybe President Hinckley knows where, I don't ). At the Judgment Day they will receive a fully glorified body (v.40) that citizens of the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom will receive. Joseph Smith returned them to Moroni after the translation was done. See here in the Testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith. It's at the end of the last big paragraph. Joseph Smith says he gave the plates back to Moroni who had them in his charge at the time of Joseph Smith's writing his testimony in 1838. Hope that helps. :) Congratulations on finishing the whole book! Interesting though, that Joseph had to pray with thh e3 witnesses to SEE the plates and have Moroni to show them(and they did'nt touch them) while with the 8 witnesses it required no prayer and Joseph had the plates with him and handled them to them....for the first ocasion Smith did not have the plates, but for the second he suddenly had them... regards,

I stand corrected, Maureen. LOL.

Science stated no such thing. Religion on the other hand (and specifically Christian theologians) did teach the world was flat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_earth The key difference here is that Science does not pretend to advocate ultimate "truth". It just is. Religion, on the other hand, is constantly having to justify itself, in light of it's own failure (like the 2nd coming that's still never happened) and its increasing irrelavence in an enlightened age. "Diamond Truth".

Lion Heart; I am as lds as anybody here, in fact, while talking to some leaders this weekend I decided to give it a chance, and i decided to go on my mission(as planned) on January. Anyways, that does not mean that I have to find every possible way to justify or "spiritualize" every wrong deed committed by the Leaders, starting with Joseph Smith. That is a healthy faith. Read "I dont have a testimony of the History of the Church" in FAIRLDS.ORG , and you'll see it. My point, it is important the melquisedec issue, not because it will finally lead to any "falseness" in the Church, but because WE have made it hyper important. It is interesting though, that when Moroni spoke to Josepg he told him that he would eventually get the holy priesthood (of melquisedec) and be filled with the holy Spirit, but then, when John came and ordained them, as they baptized each other, Smith says they were "filled" with the Holy Ghost as to "prophecy" and "revelation", a concept that not every latter day saint agrees NOW, but because it was Joseph, well...If now i told you that my 12 year old kid, after being baptized(not confirmed) and ordained to the aaronic priesthood, he was "filled" and "prophecied" you are gonna tell me that is "not th eproper order' and hence "not of God". Just as we wrongly dismiss our fellow christians as apostates and not "rightful" partakers of the Fulness of the Grace of God in terms of His Spirit. I see a historic struggle here, my point, is that although i see that, i dont have to stop believing in Joseph, but it is as wrong to stop believing in Joseph because of this, as it is to believe in him denying this altogether! That is why I admire lds scholars, they get it. We cant be good mormon christians if we deny every struggle in our history. Cause WE hold from such standards to judge th everacity of other Churches, but when it comes to ours...well. Regards,

You've never been a missionary huh? Just what do you think the purpose of the "restoration" is, if not evidence that the christian community is in a fallen state of apostasy? I know the discussions have changed in the last 10 years, but we used to use the word "apostasy" when teaching our investigators. Perhaps this is true for some exmormons, but it's overgeneralizing to say the least. Many exmormons feel betrayed, lied to, and let down. They experience the same feelings as does the woman who discovers her husband is having an affair. Confusion and a total loss of trust is what they feel. How can you understand it unless you've experienced it? Bob, Yeah, but Bob, whever the posts do become like this, people get bored and leave. You can only have so many posts about homemaking night, ya know? Consider our position. Do you refer to the founder of Islam as "The Prophet Mohamed" or simply as "Mohamed"? And why? I don't make anything up Bob. I quote and reference everything I say. I consider my time here "fun", true enough, but I also consider that Im helping Mormons out as well. What I contribute may strengthen their testiomonies, or it may cause them to pause and reflect, with the possibility of leaving. Either way, Im doing something useful. Again, now you see Jason why do I feel some times as i do, they just dont accept facts. Is it difficlut to accept that there is the SAME psicological effect on both parties? Ex and stills?

It will be a Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays. Yes, but let them say what they use to say. Of course, we dont know the day Moses parted the red sea(or see of Reeds), or the day you'll get extra money, or for the issue here, th eday the melquisedec priesthood was given, but then again we know the day that the lesser priesthood was given and the whole account....guess how's the importance of the melquisedec priesthood shown when only to th elesser one did Smith dedicate a narrative regards,

That's easy. Nobody knows. Jackpot!

Thanks for asking, and dont worry, I wont slip it too much as to make them hide this one also, lol. cuz he dont know the handshake LOL!!!! Dr.T: the 2) reffers to the mix of contradictory and false and dumb theories that with time became Doctrine, and also that which did not(thanks God), including Heber C.Kimball's, Young's, pratt's, etc.. the 3) reffers to the politics9actions, rules, "doctrines", changing concepts, etc... that with the time just makes it even more difficult to members(like me) to hold on to 'this Truth". Including the politics ogf the church leaders, homosexuality, proslitism, etc..

It's pretty clear to those who are interested and pay attention. B) bah!

No, I must simply accept that it is your opinion that there is some "contradiction." In my view, there certainly is not. If you study the scriptures you know that there have been many times that God did things one way, then another. Hopefully you will gain a greater understanding of the situation. I just wont press this any further.

Dont bring me that stuffed-sentimental reasoning, i know the theological and social implications of me steping out of the Church. Indeed, while talking to Greg(Kearney), i agreed to stay a while and keep reading and praying about it. So dont press my buttons. I dont have any trouble at all at understanding the Church's teachings, where do you get that from? From statemnts that you dislike but find suitable to deny boldly? I know God talks to people, I just don believe that He only talks to a mormon leader. Why would i share the false message this Church teaches? Or why would i stay in the Church if i DONT feel GOOD or HONST about it? Do you preffer hipocracy to honesty? Well, it would not surprise me at all, with all th elds history you all got as heritage. Lets keep it simple, I am lds(as long as I remain enlisted), and you are my brother(indeed), and i just happen to be talking to you of things worthy to pay attention.

wow...even i know the secret handshake and i'm relatively new here well, i know the token(lol) but i didnt know the forum stuff

When did Peter, John and James came and ordained Smith and Cowdery? Regards,

Jason and outshine: 1) I also wonder if by christmas i would still be lds 2) I AM lds, although i dont agree with a lot of it*(do i have to submit completely to every stupidity of leaders in order to say that Iam of that faith?) 3)no, i am not boastfully negligent, nor proud as most leaders that admit no counsel for them, 4)let me be, I am not telling you that my way or the hig way, but you must accept that is a contradicction. baptism in scriptures require not a font. It was effectuated in rivers for both living and dead, until Elohim told that th eliving could but the dead no mre unless in a temple. The marriages also, any authority worthy of that name in the Church will tell you that sealings for time and eternity are ONLY allowed in the temple, thats why no common lds considers the chapel a "house of the Lord" for His presence is not even conceived to be there as it should be at the 'holy' temple. The scriptures that speak of how baptism for th edead required a temple also reffer to a font because of th elogic reason of not having a river inside of it, also, it speaks of a House of order in which ORDENANCES could be acceptable, Surely, baptism is not "ordenances" of the Holy Temple. So we must(as it is) apply th esame need of a Temple to the baptisms for the dead as to the endowments and sealings. While admitting so, we encounter that Smith, only provided importance to one, while left the other (for secret porpuses) intact and changing.

Is that information concerning "tough" topics being conceled to another restricted area available to all as they enter the page? No. Is is nowhere there posted that if they would like to explore such topics they should look for such a forum. Indeed, in the 8 months that i got here i dint notice that as well as others. I mean, unless we were all dumb enough(which is a possibility ), lol, Serg, I don't think the LDS here are trying to cover up, as much as they're saying "Hey, you can find and read about that somewhere else." I don't agree with many of the policies here at LDSTALK, but I shrug and live with them if I want to stay and play. I know you're upset, but take it out on Heather or one of the MODS, not the other posters here. Well, my conversation may be felt as anger, but i tell you is not. If as i see any statement of mine concerning the logic-lack of such actions is only gonna arise tension, then, i submit to "thy" rules, and wont say another uselless thing As much as i see that it struggles with ourpoints of view, i respect the politics of this or any site. i do not believe that is an lds cover up, that would require many other factors that are not present here(nor could be), so peace!

Is that information concerning "tough" topics being conceled to another restricted area available to all as they enter the page? No. Is is nowhere there posted that if they would like to explore such topics they should look for such a forum. Indeed, in the 8 months that i got here i dint notice that as well as others. I mean, unless we were all dumb enough(which is a possibility ), lol, Serg, I don't think the LDS here are trying to cover up, as much as they're saying "Hey, you can find and read about that somewhere else." I don't agree with many of the policies here at LDSTALK, but I shrug and live with them if I want to stay and play. I know you're upset, but take it out on Heather or one of the MODS, not the other posters here. Well, my conversation may be felt as anger, but i tell you is not. If as i see any statement of mine concerning the logic-lack of such actions is only gonna arise tension, then, i submit to "thy" rules, and wont say another uselless thing

That is just given in a context of pure blindness. Of course, you are not blind, but willing to see what you want. You say that because there is NO place God is therefore not limited, hum...tell that to D&C when God prohibited Joe Smith to baptize people for th edead without a temple!

Is that information concerning "tough" topics being conceled to another restricted area available to all as they enter the page? No. Is is nowhere there posted that if they would like to explore such topics they should look for such a forum. Indeed, in the 8 months that i got here i dint notice that as well as others. I mean, unless we were all dumb enough(which is a possibility ), lol,

Thanks for asking, and dont worry, I wont slip it too much as to make them hide this one also, lol. 1) THE LIFE OF jOSEPH sMITH 2) The development of theology between 1830-1860 3) Finally the development of politics in the Church

No sister, When I say "power" i reffer to the capacity of the administration to do as they please with the threads, of course , as they are lds like you, their motives and actions also beneficiate you, in as much as you consent their actions and points of view, you "share" power with them, is just philosophical. i am not "grieping".

Outshine: Sister, it is indeed a contradiction. I dont even have to pin point it because it just pops out! Please, be serious, it is a contradiction.

Serg, You don't believe in MOST of our church? i am terribly sorry to admit so, but is as Smith himself said "truth, diamond truth". ;(