Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

D&D Theology's "Ask About Mormonism" Thread Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    Even as a youngster Smith was clearly a confident child with good oration skills & a vivid memory....unless his mother was a liar?


    This actually appears to be a very common reply when I ask a Mormon a question - "well of course it's true, unless they were lying!" - As if they find it outrageous to even suggest that somebody in the past might have lied or made something up?!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    I hope that wasn't an attempt at answering the question.
    No it wasn't. I have never seen the entire episode so can't really give an answer, I just thought I'd share a story.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)
    The only part of the bible that really claims that it is the final revelation is in, infact, the book of revelation. - Have you ever read this book? - We don't put too much of our faith into the book of revelation.
    Cough....spits Diet Coke at monitor!

    The Mormons 10th Article of Faith states:- "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God". Now surprise, surprise, the mormon leaders conveniently don't discuss which parts of the bible that they believe to be correctly translated & which parts they don't. However, I've never herd any mormon claim that the Book of Revelation is a specific book that they don't "put too much of their faith into."


    (Original post by Oven)
    We do believe that after the last of Jesus' Apostles had died that there was no-one on earth who could receive revelation from God and therefore the gospel could not be taught in its fullness - we were in a time of apostasy and were until Joseph Smith.
    Well again Oven, that's not strictly true is it, if you actually know your own religion?

    In the Book of Mormon there is an account of 12 disciples being ordained by Jesus, during his visit to America. 3 of these native Americans (know as Nephites in the BoM) are granted immortality by Jesus & spend their days travelling the land baptising people & laying on their hands to give the gift of the holy ghost. Now in mormon beliefs, the gift of the holy ghost can only be given by mormons with the higher (Melchizedek) priesthood, so these three people clearly had the Melchizedek priesthood. Now if that's the case, the Priesthood power never left the earth & therefore, there was no need for a restoration of the priesthood under Joseph Smith. Mention this to the next mormon that you meet & watch the colour drain out of their face when you ask them to explain the contradiction! (Google 'The 3 Nephites to hear the hillarious urban myths, about the three nephites appearing out of nowhere, to help mormons out of a fix)

    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    mormons are againts polyandry and polygamy in all forms, especially adultery.
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    they're not classed as offical members of the church, and the church condones and will excommunicate anyone who pratices it
    I'll deal with these two mormon myths together.

    The official Mormon church, practiced polygamy from it's early days, based on a revelation that Joseph Smith claimed to recieve. Smith practiced polygamy for many years before making the revelation public & indeed denied on many occassions, that he had more that one wife. This was a blatent lie....making Smith....erm...a liar?

    Polygamy was never legal in the United states & neither was it legal in the Mexican territory that eventually became Utah. Therefore, all mormon polygamy (being married to more than 1 wife) in the US, at all times that it was practiced...WAS ILLEGAL. This makes a mockery of the mormon article of faith 12 which states:- "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

    And mormons do not believe in sex before marriage, so don't believe their modern day apologist lies that polygamy was a sealing of 2 people, rather than a marriage.

    Now not disimilar to the convenient revelation that gave blacks the priesthood at a time when political pressure was threatening the church, another convenient revelation ended polygamy. By the late 1800's the mormons had colonised Utah territory & wanted it to recieve full statehood, with the grants & public money that came with statehood. Unfortunately this was not going to be forthcoming while polygamy was being practiced, infact the mormon church was on the verge of being prosecuted & bankrupted by an act of congress, due to the issue of polygamy. In 1890 the then church prophet conveniently recieved a revelation banning polygamy. Statehood was given but the issue didn't go away.

    In preparation for the ineviatable ban on Polygamy the mormon Prophet (can't remember if it was John Taylor or Wilfred Woodruff) hand picked some of the most important polygamist families & sent them to set up secret polygamous communites deep in rural Utah & over the border in Canada, Arizona, Mexico & Texas (basically all the places that now have polygamous mormon break off groups, that the mormons look down on!) in order to ensure that the practice of polygamy continued.

    Polygamous marriages continued to be performed in mormon temples, which caused the mormons to release a second revelation 20 years later, re-affirming their stand point that polygamy was no longer to be practiced. The last polygamous LDS prophet died in 1918.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Jist though that I'd split my last few points into a seperate post, as the last one was becomming a bit lengthy.

    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    tbh not many people still believe that mormons are polygamists...
    Dream on :hahaha:

    Despite all the PR work that the mormons have done over the last 30 odd years, if you ask most non mormons what they associate with mormonism, they will say.

    1. Polygamy
    2. The Osmonds
    3. Clean cut young men knocking on their doors

    (Original post by Oven)
    Mormons believe strongly in upholding the laws of the land. Polygamy is illegal and there is one reason why it is not practiced. Polygamy did exist in Mormon communities prior to 1890 - Brigham Young (the Second prophet) did have 17 wives. Since 1890 however, Polygamy has not been acceptable but is still being practiced by breakaway groups like the FLDS (fundamentalist church of latter day saints).
    As stated in my above post, those breakaway group were formed by the 'official' LDS mormon church, so the current splinter groups are of the LDs churches making.

    The reality is that polygamy in the next life, is still a key belief of mormonism. The mormons didn't disolve existing polygamous marriages in 1890 & the 132nd section of the Doctrine & Covenants (a 2nd book of scripture that the mormons believe in, in addition to the Bible & Book of Mormon) clearly states that polygamy will be practiced in the next life. This section wasn't dropped following the revelation in 1890.

    There is a fantastic book called Under the Banner of Heaven which details the origins of mormon polygamy & the nature of people practicing it in the break away groups today (Google the title it for more details)

    The name of the book, comes from a quote in 1880, by the 3rd prophet of the mormon church, John Taylor, who said defending the practice of polygamy: "God is greater than the United States, and when the Government conflicts with heaven, we will be ranged under the banner of heaven against the Government. The United States says we cannot marry more than one wife. God says different"

    That gives you a jist of how the mormons really felt about giving up polygamy & how they really feel about 'honouring, sustaining & upholding the law.'

    Official position is actually, polygamy was ok in bible times, then it wasn't ok in early mormon times, then it was ok, a few years later in early mormon times, the in wasn't ok from 1890 onwards, but hey... it will be ok again in the next life. Everyone clear on that?

    (Original post by there's too much love)
    So with some inspiration he just translated a whole new chapter to the bible essentially (although that's only recognised by Mormons).

    Are the teachings in these writings very different to the N.T?
    The teachings in the book of mormon are different to the current teachings in the mormon church, never mind different to the bible! The first section in the link below shows differences in doctrine between the BoM & the Doctrine & Covenants (a collection of revelations by early mormon prophets).

    http://www.bible.ca/mor-contradictions.htm

    (Original post by Oven)
    It was not an Angel who initially revealed himself to Joseph Smith - It was infact God and Jesus.

    We do accept the bible, but our feelings on it are that because it has been re-translated so many times, commas moved, phrases changed etc., its worth is not as great as the book of Mormon which has only been translated once. - This is of course not to say that we ignore the bible, because it is of course still of great importance to us.
    That's open to debate. In the early days of the church there were four different account of the first vision (the first appearance of heavenly being/beings to Joseph Smith) published (written in 1832, 1835, 1838, and 1842) The church eventually decided that the 1838 version, was the official one that they would run with.

    Again, feel free to Google Joseph Smith First Vision. I can't cover everything here but suffice to say the versions differ, with Smith initially claiming that an angel appeared to him, then later accounts claimed that it was Jesus that appeared, then god & Jesus appeared side by side (the basis for the mormons not believing in the trinity) then a complete version where it was god & Jesus together but this time they told Smith that he would be the leader of the restored church.

    Interestingly, as a former mormon I remember the date of my baptism, the date I recieve the priesthood, the dates that I left on & returned from my mission but amazingly, for a group obsessed with record keeping, the mormons don't know the date of the first vision. Yep, despite claiming to see an angel/god/god & jesus (take your pick) Smith neglected to record the date that it happened.

    (Original post by Oven)

    We do accept the bible, but our feelings on it are that because it has been re-translated so many times, commas moved, phrases changed etc., its worth is not as great as the book of Mormon which has only been translated once. - This is of course not to say that we ignore the bible, because it is of course still of great importance to us.
    Yikes.... forgive me while I roll around on the floor laughing! :shock: :rofl2:

    Despite Joseph Smith describing the Book of Mormon as "The most correct book on Earth" There have been around 4000 changes to it since the first edition including (sorry Oven!) commas moved, phrases changed etc but also major dooctrinal changes. Google changes to the Book of Mormon but here's a link to get you started.

    http://www.carm.org/religious-moveme...es-book-mormon

    The real problem for mormons is that the BoM simply quotes huge texts from the bible, Isaiah is probably the most quoted. Then years later Joseph Smith claimed that he was inspired to translate some sections of the King James Version of the bible, to correct previous errors in translation.

    However, Smith changed some of the verses that he had already included in the BoM which of course means that the most correct book on earth, actually contains some of the same incorrectly translated sections that the bible does doh lol!

    And the changes to the BoM don't even cover the fact that so much of it's content has been proved to false over time. It mentions Iron, cement, horses, domestic cattle, sheep, elephants, wheat, barley, silk & other things that were simply not on the continent during the BoM timescale. On the other hand it fails to mention many animals & crops that were native to America.

    Also, the BoM mentions wars involving hundreds of thousands of men, with swords, breast plates & helmets etc but not one scrap of evidence has been found. In the UK, you hear of amateurs using a metal detector in a farmers field to unearth ancient coins but not one sword or helmet from BoM battles have beeen found anywhere in North or South America. There is not a single non-LDS archaeologist, that claims to have found any links with the BoM & ancient America.

    It's a crock, it's grinding to a halt, it's losing more & more long standing members each year......it's Mormonism.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    that's all fascinating stuff, although very scary if it's true, again I lookforward to reading a mormon reply to it, it's always lovely to hear both sides of the story. You've written in a convincing and logical manner.

    Of course if no reply does end up being given I'll assume that what you've said can't be refuted (but I'll also pm some of the mormons asking for a reply at some point if one isn't given).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    The reality is that polygamy in the next life, is still a key belief of mormonism. The mormons didn't disolve existing polygamous marriages in 1890 & the 132nd section of the Doctrine & Covenants (a 2nd book of scripture that the mormons believe in, in addition to the Bible & Book of Mormon) clearly states that polygamy will be practiced in the next life. This section wasn't dropped following the revelation in 1890.
    Yes.


    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    The name of the book, comes from a quote in 1880, by the 3rd prophet of the mormon church, John Taylor, who said defending the practice of polygamy: "God is greater than the United States, and when the Government conflicts with heaven, we will be ranged under the banner of heaven against the Government. The United States says we cannot marry more than one wife. God says different"

    That gives you a jist of how the mormons really felt about giving up polygamy & how they really feel about 'honouring, sustaining & upholding the law.'
    Imo that's an unfair analysis of the LDS belief in upholding the law. - Yes, we believe in following the law and being subject to our leaders, but there will always be times that the law of the land conflicts with the law of God. In those cases the law of God will always come first.


    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    Despite Joseph Smith describing the Book of Mormon as "The most correct book on Earth" There have been around 4000 changes to it since the first edition including (sorry Oven!) commas moved, phrases changed etc but also major dooctrinal changes.
    This is a point which seems to regularly come up. Yes, there have been changes to it - but necessary changes where incorrect spelling was made (the scribes were only human). Grammar changed to reflect the true meaning of the scripture - the initial translation was only as correct as you would expect from someone translating archaic Hebraic or Hieroglyphs.

    What people seem to forget is that the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon is still available as a reprint from most church gift and book stores! - The changes that separate the original scripture and the scripture in its current form are hardly a dirty little secret that the church is trying to hide.

    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    it's a crock, it's grinding to a halt, it's losing more & more long standing members each year......it's Mormonism.
    It's also currently one of the fastest growing religions in the world.

    Now - let's work on the basis that the church isn't true. - Does that then mean that the church has nothing to offer? Of course not.

    The LDS church creates standards - standards of acceptable dress, standards of acceptable behavior, standards of acceptable language, it keeps families stronger and marriages within the Church are much less likely to end in divorce (there is evidence to back that up somewhere but I've forgotten where I read it). - The church would almost never let it's members go without food on their plates and a roof over their head. - It teaches children the importance of their education, it teaches parents the appropriate ways to care for their children etc. etc. etc. - All of these teaching are founded upon the principles of the gospel.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)
    Imo that's an unfair analysis of the LDS belief in upholding the law. - Yes, we believe in following the law and being subject to our leaders, but there will always be times that the law of the land conflicts with the law of God. In those cases the law of God will always come first.
    It looked pretty fair to me, you'll uphold all of your laws and any laws which do not contradict your laws but are the laws of the land.

    This is a point which seems to regularly come up. Yes, there have been changes to it - but necessary changes where incorrect spelling was made (the scribes were only human). Grammar changed to reflect the true meaning of the scripture - the initial translation was only as correct as you would expect from someone translating archaic Hebraic or Hieroglyphs.
    Who makes these changes out of curisoity, what do they translate from to know that corrections were meant to be made.

    What people seem to forget is that the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon is still available as a reprint from most church gift and book stores! - The changes that separate the original scripture and the scripture in its current form are hardly a dirty little secret that the church is trying to hide.
    However is that book as correct as the latest version? And will there be new versions?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)

    Who makes these changes out of curisoity, what do they translate from to know that corrections were meant to be made.


    However is that book as correct as the latest version? And will there be new versions?
    There are 2 reasons why the Book of Mormon would ever be changed: 1 - To keep the text readable and understandable - if the English language changes so much that the 1830 English in which the Book of Mormon is written in becomes too complex for most people to read, I would presume that it would be updated slightly to make it slightly more understandable - however - the 2nd criteria for changes would be to ensure that the text stays as true to the intended original meaning behind the scripture. Therefore any further changes that were made would have to adhere to that.

    Examples of changes that have been made to the Book of Mormon include:
    "if he should command me that I should say unto this water be thou earth and it shall be earth" (O) [this now reads "If he should command me that I should say unto this water, be thou earth, it should be earth...."]
    "and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart with real intent having faith in Christ and he will manifest the truth of it unto you" [this now reads "and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you" - an "and" having been deleted
    Changes are often made by a committee headed by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)
    There are 2 reasons why the Book of Mormon would ever be changed: 1 - To keep the text readable and understandable - if the English language changes so much that the 1830 English in which the Book of Mormon is written in becomes too complex for most people to read, I would presume that it would be updated slightly to make it slightly more understandable - however - the 2nd criteria for changes would be to ensure that the text stays as true to the intended original meaning behind the scripture. Therefore any further changes that were made would have to adhere to that.

    Examples of changes that have been made to the Book of Mormon include:



    Changes are often made by a committee headed by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
    So in practise the changes are translations of translations?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    So in practise the changes are translations of translations?
    Depends how you personally interpret the cause of the changes
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)
    Depends how you personally interpret the cause of the changes
    The only inturrpretation I can see is that they're translated from tablets of another language from long ago into 19th century English and then from "olde" English into current English and eventually either again from 19th century English into what will become the current English language or from 21st century English into what will become the current English language.

    How else is there to see it?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    The only inturrpretation I can see is that they're translated from tablets of another language from long ago into 19th century English and then from "olde" English into current English and eventually either again from 19th century English into what will become the current English language or from 21st century English into what will become the current English language.

    How else is there to see it?
    The book of Mormon is still written in 19th century English.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)
    Yes.

    Imo that's an unfair analysis of the LDS belief in upholding the law. - Yes, we believe in following the law and being subject to our leaders, but there will always be times that the law of the land conflicts with the law of God. In those cases the law of God will always come first.
    What an incredible comment!!

    Is that an admission that the mormons will always put the law of god, above the law of the land? If so, why did Joseph Smith claim that mormons are subject to kings, Presidents & Rulers & would uphold & sustain the law of the land? If you're right, he was a liar. If Smith was right then....erm....you are a li...erm mistaken.

    (Original post by Oven)
    Yes.

    This is a point which seems to regularly come up. Yes, there have been changes to it - but necessary changes where incorrect spelling was made (the scribes were only human). Grammar changed to reflect the true meaning of the scripture - the initial translation was only as correct as you would expect from someone translating archaic Hebraic or Hieroglyphs.

    What people seem to forget is that the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon is still available as a reprint from most church gift and book stores! - The changes that separate the original scripture and the scripture in its current form are hardly a dirty little secret that the church is trying to hide.
    Smith personally dictated the text to his scribes, allegedly (according to mormon belief) 'under the gift & power of God. Could Smith not have simply proof read the finished manuscript, before handing it over to the printer? Due to the amount of visits that Smith had from god/jesus/Angels/Peter, James & John, couldn't one of these heavenly visitors have corrected any potential errors in 'the most correct book on earth'?

    Surely the initial translation should have been 100% word perfect. The reason that mormons view the bible as 'lesser' than the BoM, is because they believe it has been altered in translations over the years, therfore losing many of its 'plain & precious truths.' Isn't the perfect translation from the gold plates meant to ensure this couldn't happen with the BoM?

    Regarding your comment that the initial translation was only as correct as you would expect from someone translating archaic Hebraic or Hieroglyphs. erm....you do know that the currrent mormon leaders admit that Smith didn't actaully translate directly from the gold plates, for most of the project don't you?

    Check out the link below to a talk by Russell M. Nelson. He's currently one of the mormon 12 Apostles & the talk was published in the mormons monthly magazine, The Ensign.

    http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.js...____&hideNav=1

    Nelson admits that....

    “Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear.

    So as you can see, any mistakes are nothing to do with Smiths 'archaic Hebraic' translation skills, he was simply reading an English translation that appeared before his eyes. The gold plates weren't even in the same room as Smith, for most of the translation processs.

    http://www.mormonthink.com/img/trans5.jpg

    You claim that the original transcript is still available from the church & isn't something that they are trying to hide, you also claim that you are a return missionary, so here's my question. During the 2 years of your mission service, how many of your investigators did you give a copy of the original version to & how many did you inform about the 4,000 changes since the original version?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oven)

    Now - let's work on the basis that the church isn't true. -
    Good idea, let's stick to facts. :laugh:

    (Original post by Oven)

    It's also currently one of the fastest growing religions in the world.
    Well it certainly ain't the fastest, this is yet another often repeated mormon myth. The mormon church enjoyed great growth through out the post war years of the 1950's through to the 1980's. During this time an independant (non-mormon) researcher carried out a study, that showed if the mormon church continued to enjoy similar growth fover the next century, it would reach 250 million plus members. Mormons immediately
    jumped onto this research as proof that they were the true church & that gods hand would turn it into the world '4th religion'.

    Unfortunately for mormons, the research didn't turn into fact & convert growth in the LDS church flatlined as the 1980's came to a close. In 1999 the mormon Prophet Gordon B Hinkley, challenged the 50,000 mormon missionaries, to double the number of convert baptisms. In the five years that followed this was the result of his challenge....

    1999 - 306,171
    2000 - 273,973
    2001 - 292,612
    2002 - 283,138
    2003 - 242,923

    Yep, the Prophet hath spoke.

    The reality is that Catholics/Born Again Christians & Muslims are all much faster growing than the mormons. I'm guessing that the JW's are at least as fast growing as the mormons, so this puts gods true church at what...the 4th or 5th fastest growing church.

    (Original post by Oven)
    There are 2 reasons why the Book of Mormon would ever be changed: 1 - To keep the text readable and understandable - if the English language changes so much that the 1830 English in which the Book of Mormon is written in becomes too complex for most people to read, I would presume that it would be updated slightly to make it slightly more understandable - however - the 2nd criteria for changes would be to ensure that the text stays as true to the intended original meaning behind the scripture. Therefore any further changes that were made would have to adhere to that.

    Well in theory point 1 shouldn't ever happen, as mormons have been claiming for the best part of 200 years, that the holy spirit will guide readers of the BoM, to know that it is true.
    Your 2nd point doesn't make ANY sense at all? How can making changes to the text possibly ensure that it stays true to it's ORIGINAL meaning.


    (Original post by Oven)
    Changes are often made by a committee headed by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.
    Was it this committee that made the most recent change to the BoM? The change that the mormons have been forced into, in the face of compelling DNA evidence proving that Native Americans have ABSOLUTELY NO Jewish DNA.

    The LDS Church has changed a single word in its introduction to the Book of Mormon, a change observers say has serious implications for commonly held LDS beliefs about the ancestry of American Indians.

    Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe founder Joseph Smith unearthed a set of gold plates from a hill in upperstate New York in 1827 and translated the ancient text into English. The account, known as The Book of Mormon, tells the story of two Israelite civilizations living in the New World. One derived from a single family who fled from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. and eventually splintered into two groups, known as the Nephites and Lamanites.

    The book's current introduction, added by the late LDS apostle, Bruce R. McConkie in 1981, includes this statement: "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."

    The new version, seen first in Doubleday's revised edition, reads, "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians."
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlphaOmega)

    You claim that the original transcript is still available from the church & isn't something that they are trying to hide, you also claim that you are a return missionary, so here's my question. During the 2 years of your mission service, how many of your investigators did you give a copy of the original version to & how many did you inform about the 4,000 changes since the original version?
    I'll reply to the rest when I have time, but I think you have misread something, I am not an RM.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlphaOmega)



    Your 2nd point doesn't make ANY sense at all? How can making changes to the text possibly ensure that it stays true to it's ORIGINAL meaning.

    The meaning of the plates, not the meaning of the first translation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hi again,

    I thought I'd re-post my question in case it had been missed, it's on page six of this thread.
    Thanks

    (Original post by jmj)
    Hi,

    It's my understanding (please correctly if I am wrong) that Joseph Smith was visited by the angel Moroni- what do you think of the fact that the Bible strongly warns against the devil masquerading as the angel of light, which seems to fit Smith's description of Moroni?

    Extract taken from Joseph Smith's testimony, taken from my Book of Mormon:

    "While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was brighter than noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor.

    "He had a loose robe of exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen' nor do I believe any earthly thing could be made to appear so brilliant...

    ..."Not only was his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond description, and his countenance truly like lightening. The room was exceedingly light, but not so very bright as immediately round his person..."

    2 Corinthians 11:14:
    14And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    JMJ....your question won't have been missed by the resident Mormons, it will have been deliberately ignored. Bizarre really, when you consider the title of this thread & the fact that it was started by a mormon!

    Mormons are very good at posting the PR friendly side of mormonism on public forums like this but sadly abysmal at giving credible answers to difficult questions......as proved by a complete lack of response to the many points that I raised.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlphaOmega)
    JMJ....your question won't have been missed by the resident Mormons, it will have been deliberately ignored. Bizarre really, when you consider the title of this thread & the fact that it was started by a mormon!

    Mormons are very good at posting the PR friendly side of mormonism on public forums like this but sadly abysmal at giving credible answers to difficult questions......as proved by a complete lack of response to the many points that I raised.
    I fear that if this isn't answered then I will start to side with this view. I shall pm oven.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jmj)
    Hi again,

    I thought I'd re-post my question in case it had been missed, it's on page six of this thread.
    Thanks
    Can I ask if you believe an angel can appear as an angel of light?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 2, 2009
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.