Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Jaye wrote:
ThomasK wrote:
I want to state that Brigham Young's teachings concerning Blacks, in my opinion, was wrong. I do not know why the Priesthood was withheld. It has been restored, I sustain this. Any other statements that Brigham Young made concerning Blacks I consider not to be of God and I condemn them. That does not mean that I do not sustain him as a Prophet of God.

In the Bible...it is written that a man may be known by his words and his actions.

Jesus said..."Either make the tree good, and his fruit good, or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh.

A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

So...is it possible that a man who has spoken such hateful and bigoted words regarding our black brothers and sisters can still be considered to be the mouthpiece of the Lord?

The Lord also said..."Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father, which is in heaven.

Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?

And then I will profess unto them...I never knew you: depart from me, ye that worketh iniquity."

I'm sorry Thomas...I disagree with you on this point. For one thing...I don't believe that Brigham Young was chosen by God to lead the Church...although the perilous times called for a strong leader...and he was certainly a strong man...a strong willed man...and a man who brooked no argument.

I do not believe that God would select a man who's heart was filled with such hatred and bigotry for his black brothers and sisters.

Especially since Joseph Smith had already been ordaining worthy black men to the priesthood for some time before his death.

And if the founder of the faith, a man who was said to see God the Father, and the Son face to face...and said to receive the priesthood directly from Peter, James and John, had not been informed that the blacks were not worthy to receive the priesthood in their mortal life...I do not believe that God ever instructed Brigham Young to deny it to them.

For me...this places his status as prophet in doubt.

As does his teaching that Christ's Atonement was not sufficient to save sinners...and that their OWN blood must also be shed.

That contradicts everything that Jesus taught...and that the Christian faith believes.


So what are you saying Jaye, if Brigham Young wasn't chosen by God, does that not make every Prophet after him to be in direct line of Authority apostate also?

Not necessarily. It would have to depend upon how closely each man adhered to Christian principles...by their words, and their deeds.

This contradict's LDS doctine though Jay. As we believe the Prophet holds all the Keys as the Prophet, when he dies they are passed to the twelve, who choose a new Prophet, so if Brigham was not supposed to be a Godly chosen Prophet as you are saying, then he didn't hold the Keys, thus none of the other Prophets after him do. Just can't be if your claim is true. The church would not have proper authority, which is what I think you believe but won't say.

According to this religious organization...all of the keys are held by the Prophet.

But does this mean that the Prophet continues to hold these keys even when he is not worthy to do so?

Many are called...but few are chosen.

The Lord said...'Not everyone that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father, which is in heaven.

Many will say unto Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?

And then I will profess unto them...I never knew you; depart from Me, ye that work iniquity!'

IMPO...whether a man is worthy to hold these keys depends solely upon his words and his works.

And as human beings are prone to errors...it is entirely possible that there were a number of men who were mistakenly set up as prophet, seer and revelator within the LDS faith.

In Brigham Young's case...this procedure had not been implemented...as nobody had expected Joseph Smith to die without instructing the Church as to the proper procedure for succession to leadership.

And in the case of Young's successor...and his, and his...the procedure was implemented in order of seniority.


But that's the point, if Brigham *(as you say) lost the keys through apostacy, then wouldn't that make those after him also left without Keys?

Not necessarily. If God could restore keys to one man...and he...OR his immediate successor...or any number of successors screwed up...God could just as easily restore the keys to other men.

Dubbs wrote:
BLogan wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs: Christ said this is the last dispensation of time, it will not be taken away until he comes again.

====

No, man said that Christ said. Big difference.


Christ said this is the last days, same difference.

Or are you denying that we are in the last days? Have you read Revelations at all? Ask your preacher to have a lesson on it, it's clear there we are.

dubbs, I thought you anti-Christian Bible bashers didn't believe in the Bible.

Never said that. Typical anti nutjob making things up or not comprehending simple english.

I comprehend simple English...as well as more complicated English.

And YOU said that the Bible contained so many mistakes...that it was DISGUSTING.

Dubbs wrote:
Wren wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
I irritated you enough to not understand a joke was being made and ask "what kind of person" would do that. Again, relax bud.

Bearyb was not being rude, but you are, to one who believes as you. Be polite.

Kiss my butt.

Oh how very 'BISHOPLY' of you.

ThomasK wrote:

I want to state that Brigham Young's teachings concerning Blacks, in my opinion, was wrong. I do not know why the Priesthood was withheld. It has been restored, I sustain this. Any other statements that Brigham Young made concerning Blacks I consider not to be of God and I condemn them. That does not mean that I do not sustain him as a Prophet of God.


WOW! Thomas K calls Brigham Young a false Prophet!
Then he sustains him as a Prophet!

You have got to be kidding me, that is why mormons have to have what is called double thought!

Brainwashing at it's best!

.

ThomasK wrote:

Any other statements that Brigham Young made concerning Blacks I consider not to be of God and I condemn them.

Brigham Young was following what the his Mormon God told him!

And if you where true to that God you would do the same Thomas!


Here is what the Mormon God has to say about it!

Book of Moses Chapter 7
8 For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.

20 And it came to pass that Enoch talked with the Lord; and he said unto the Lord: Surely Zion shall dwell in safety forever. But the Lord said unto Enoch: Zion have I blessed, but the residue of the people have I cursed.

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.


So Thomas do you believe the above verses to be true or false?


.

Dubbs wrote:
The standard argument of the critics is that Joseph produced the Book of Abraham from a few characters on the Sensen scroll...To call the Book of Abraham a translation of the few glyphs in the margins hardly makes sense... If Joseph had indeed claimed to be translating entire paragraphs of complex English text from single Egyptian characters ("shorthand" hieratic script, not elaborate glyphs), his associates who worked with him during the days of translation should have been suspicious. One of the scribes assisting in the work, Warren Parrish, did later turn against Joseph and the Church. But mantioned nothing of it.

Who's writing have you plagiarized here Kent?