Facts MORMONS Won't Tell You................

The Book of Mormon is about 70% word for fucking word copy and paste from the bible...

Why would I want to read the Book of Mormon?

"The words of the wise ones are like oxgoads, and just like nails driven in are those indulging in collections [of sentences]; they have been given from one shepherd. As regards anything besides these, my son, take a warning: To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion [to them] is wearisome to the flesh" Eccl 12:11, 12

“No prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.” 2 Pet. 1:20, 21

"All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16, 17

And the other 30% is straight from the masonic guidebook...

I am a Mormon and, while I can tell you that there are a lot of peculiar things about my religion, I can tell you that the above post is pure BS. Nothing of the kind has ever happened in the LDS Church, either during the 19th Century or today.

I think that the Mormon Church might have some Truth in it. But I also think that it has been infiltrated by Gadianton Robbers. I think that Mitt Romney and his kind are chief among these Robbers. It is a scary time for all.

*** Did Jesus Really Die on a Cross? ***
“THE cross,” says one encyclopedia, “is the most familiar symbol of Christianity.” Many religious paintings and works of art depict Jesus nailed to a cross. Why is this symbol so widespread in Christendom? Did Jesus really die on a cross?

Many would point to the Bible for the answer. For example, according to the King James Version, at the time of Jesus’ execution, onlookers made fun of Jesus and challenged him to “come down from the cross.” (Matthew 27:40, 42) Many other Bible translations read similarly. Today’s English Version says of Simon from Cyrene: “The soldiers forced him to carry Jesus’ cross.” (Mark 15:21) In these verses, the word “cross” is translated from the Greek word stauros′. Is there a solid basis for such a translation? What is the meaning of that original word?

Was It a Cross?
According to Greek scholar W. E. Vine, stauros′ “denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb stauroō, to fasten to a stake or pale, are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross.”

The Imperial Bible-Dictionary says that the word stauros′ “properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling a piece of ground.” The dictionary continues: “Even amongst the Romans the crux (Latin, from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.” Thus, it is not surprising that The Catholic Encyclopedia states: “Certain it is, at any rate, that the cross originally consisted of a simple vertical pole, sharpened at its upper end.”

There is another Greek word, xy′lon, that Bible writers used to describe the instrument of Jesus’ execution. A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament defines xy′lon as “a piece of timber, a wooden stake.” It goes on to say that like stauros′, xy′lon “was simply an upright pale or stake to which the Romans nailed those who were thus said to be crucified.”

In line with this, we note that the King James Version reads at Acts 5:30: “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree [xy′lon].” Other versions, though rendering stauros′ as “cross,” also translate xy′lon as “tree.” At Acts 13:29, The Jerusalem Bible says of Jesus: “When they had carried out everything that scripture foretells about him they took him down from the tree [xy′lon] and buried him.”

In view of the basic meaning of the Greek words stauros′ and xy′lon, the Critical Lexicon and Concordance, quoted above, observes: “Both words disagree with the modern idea of a cross, with which we have become familiarised by pictures.” In other words, what the Gospel writers described using the word stauros′ was nothing like what people today call a cross. Appropriately, therefore, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures uses the expression “torture stake” at Matthew 27:40-42 and in other places where the word stauros′ appears. Similarly, the Complete Jewish Bible uses the expression “execution stake.”

Origin of the Cross
If the Bible does not really say that Jesus was executed on a cross, then why do all the churches that claim to teach and follow the Bible—Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox—adorn their buildings with the cross and use it as a symbol of their faith? How did the cross come to be such a popular symbol?

The answer is that the cross is venerated not only by churchgoers who claim to follow the Bible but also by people far removed from the Bible and whose worship far predates that of “Christian” churches. Numerous religious reference works acknowledge that the use of crosses in various shapes and forms goes back to remote periods of human civilization. For example, ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics and depictions of their gods and goddesses often show a cross in the shape of a T with a circle at the top. It is called the ansate, or handle-shaped, cross and is thought to be a symbol of life. In time, this form of the cross was adopted and used extensively by the Coptic Church and others.

According to The Catholic Encyclopedia, “the primitive form of the cross seems to have been that of the so-called ‘gamma’ cross (crux gammata), better known to Orientalists and students of prehistoric archæology by its Sanskrit name, swastika.” This sign was widely used among Hindus in India and Buddhists throughout Asia and is still seen in decorations and ornaments in those areas.

It is not known exactly when the cross was adopted as a “Christian” symbol. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words states: “By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols,” including the cross.

Some writers point to the claim by the sun-god worshipper Constantine that in 312 C.E., while on one of his military campaigns, he had a vision of a cross superimposed on the sun along with the motto in Latin “in hoc vince” (by this conquer). Some time later, a “Christian” sign was emblazoned on the standards, shields, and armor of his army. (Pictured at left.) Constantine purportedly converted to Christianity, though he was not baptized until 25 years later on his deathbed. His motive was questioned by some. “He acted rather as if he were converting Christianity into what he thought most likely to be accepted by his subjects as a catholic [universal] religion, than as if he had been converted to the teachings of Jesus the Nazarene,” says the book The Non-Christian Cross.

Since then, crosses of many forms and shapes have come into use. For example, The Illustrated Bible Dictionary tells us that what is called St. Anthony’s cross “was shaped like a capital T, thought by some to be derived from the symbol of the [Babylonian] god Tammuz, the letter tau.” There was also the St. Andrew’s cross, which is in the shape of the letter X, and the familiar two-beamed cross with the crossbar lowered. This latter type, called the Latin cross, is erroneously “held by tradition to be the shape of the cross on which our Lord died.”

What First-Century Christians Believed
The Bible shows that in the first century, many who heard Jesus became believers and accepted the redeeming value of his sacrificial death. After the apostle Paul preached to the Jews in Corinth, proving that Jesus is the Christ, says the Bible, “Crispus the presiding officer of the synagogue became a believer in the Lord, and so did all his household. And many of the Corinthians that heard began to believe and be baptized.” (Acts 18:5-8) Instead of introducing some religious symbol or image into their worship, Paul instructed his fellow Christians to “flee from idolatry” and from any other practice drawn from pagan worship.—1 Corinthians 10:14.

Historians and researchers have found no evidence to validate the use of the cross among the early Christians. Interestingly, the book History of the Cross quotes one late 17th-century writer who asked: “Can it be pleasing to the blessed Jesus to behold His disciples glorying in the image of that instrument of capital punishment on which He [supposedly] patiently and innocently suffered, despising the shame?” How would you answer?

Worship acceptable to God does not require objects or images. “What agreement does God’s temple have with idols?” Paul asked. (2 Corinthians 6:14-16) Nowhere do the Scriptures suggest that a Christian’s worship should include the use of a likeness of the instrument used to impale Jesus.—Compare Matthew 15:3; Mark 7:13.

What, then, is the identifying mark of true Christians? Not the cross or any other symbol, but love. Jesus told his followers: “I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.”—John 13:34, 35.

I got this information from a book that was written by Joseph Smiths granddaughter and 3 ex-comunicated elders. Although the practice was outlawed by the church many years later, the fact is it happened. I still stand by the fact that Joseph Smith was a sadist and that is how that practice got started. He took it onto himself to make sure that first born was pure mormon. Do you really think your church is going to tell people that? don't follow so blindly that which you do not know. I have read the book of mormon and studied it many years, was married to one for a while too. I know that when faced with clear evidence of Joseph Smiths debotcherous ways and lies and claims by ex-mormons, I was shortly divorced and sent away. The fact is, mormonism is a cult and it was started on a lie. Joseph Smith was not sent from god, he created his own religion and I still can't believe it stuck.

Any non Mormon from Utah will tell you, there is little difference between Mormons and Muslims. That's why I call it mormanistan. No matter what Mormons say, they are NOT Christian. Not even close. That said, I'd probably still vote for Romney if I was forced to vote. For all you people out there with little exposure to motard culture, don't be fooled, Mormons are NOTHING like you think.. unless u think they are coniving polygamists, then you've got them figured right.

Wow now there's the voice of a true idiot.

I'm not saying this for or against Latter Day Saints, but...Joseph Smith and his brother Hiram were both Freemasons. Lots of LDS ritual is copied from Freemasonry. This is not well known by the average mormon, but it's well known by the higher ups in SLC. Also, many believe that Joseph Smith was murdered by Freemasons for revealing certain secrets that he, as a Freemason, pledged not to do so on punishment of death. Both Joseph and his brother Hiram were shot and killed in the Carthage jail. As Joseph was shot trying to escape out the window, he cried out the Masonic sign of distress: "Oh Lord my God, is there no help for the Widow's Son?!" And he did this while performing the corollary arms gesture.

The Book of Mormon quotes a lot of the Bible. But no where near 70%. Interesting that someone brought up the Dead Sea Scrolls. Analysis shows that the Isaiah quoted by Nephi in the Book of Mormon is closer to the Dead Sea Scrolls Isaiah than the KJV Isaiah. How did Joseph Smith pull that one off?

There is nothing Masonic in the Book of Mormon. The LDS endowment ceremony, on the other hand, is about 95% taken from Masonry. That, honestly, bothers me a lot.

Who is the widow's son?

Hiram Abiff :)

The Book of Mormon quotes a lot of the Bible. But no where near 70%. Interesting that someone brought up the Dead Sea Scrolls. Analysis shows that the Isaiah quoted by Nephi in the Book of Mormon is closer to the Dead Sea Scrolls Isaiah than the KJV Isaiah. How did Joseph Smith pull that one off?

There is nothing Masonic in the Book of Mormon. The LDS endowment ceremony, on the other hand, is about 95% taken from Masonry. That, honestly, bothers me a lot.

Someone clearly does not know the history of the Bible. Like I said, Deification of the Bible is one of the greatest errors of the Christianity that is the descendant of the 4th Century councils. Most ironic is your use of 2 Peter 1:20-21, for you, dear soul, are doing just what it says not to do!

here's TWO facts i'll tell you....

1.) OBAMA FUCKIN' SUCKS!

2.) YOU ARE A MISERABLE LITTLE SHITBAG.

It's spelled hyrum...his name is Hyrum smith.

I contend that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) is the newest vehicle by which to pass down the knowledge of the ancient mystery schools. Freemasonry was the biggest vehicle for doing so prior, but at the time LDS was beginning, coincidentally Freemasonry was experiencing the most severe attacks in its existence. There was even created an Anti-Masonic political party in America in 1828. When was the Mormon Church established? 1830.

Events don't occur in a vacuum. There's cause and effect.

Currently, there are over 6 million mormons in America.

Currently, there are fewer than 5 million Freemasons in America.

LDS is the new vehicle for the perpetuation of knowledge from the ancient mystery schools, using Christianity as cover.

Knock and it shall be opened to you Billy....

There are some things held very close and sacred. i respect that. and find it hard to figure out why others can't

sorry . its 5:30 not 6:30 .. duh

First, your assertions about black people are incorrect. They were allowed in the Church. Black men were simply not allowed to be members of the LDS Church's lay clergy between about 1836 and 1978. Why the change? A number of scholars have speculated over the years but the LDS Church has never made an official statement giving the reason. My personal belief? The original reason was political. When the Mormons moved to Missouri in the 1830s, the issue of slavery was a hot political topic. Mormons were against slavery but also didn't want to anger the locals so they adopted a policy of not actively proselytizing black people. This policy became ingrained as racism in the culture of the Church and, I believe, that the LDS Church was too racist to fully fellowship people of African decent until the late 1970s. The Church also did not have the capacity to staff a missionary program in Africa until that time. I think God recognizes the limits of the instruments with which He is working and plans accordingly. Am I bothered by the LDS Church's racist past? Yes. But the past 30+ years have shown that the Church is on the right path in regard to race relations.

Oh wow, they say your religion is wrong? No other religions do that...

after the Missouri governor signed an extermination order for all Mormons. many men were shot and killed. after the flight westward their were many woman left without husbands to support and care for the children. polygamy was temporary to help with the widows and orphans. the practice was stopped theirafter when Utah was close to implementing a law against the practice. and it was deemed no longer necessary for the support of those family's that had since grown up.

those men back then given the extermination orders and being driven out of many places had little reason to trust anyone. we are just human by the way. so their were countless times were the Man did not live up to Christ like behavior. Thank heavenly father for forgiveness !!

Because mormonism and the LDS church are a cult/secret society as insidious as Islam or the Vatican...

=========

now that's interesting ...why would a Governor sign an extermination order on the Mormons what were his reasons to justify such an extreme solution ???

SOMEBODY KNOWS...TELL US ALL

I got this information from a book that was written by Joseph Smiths granddaughter and 3 ex-comunicated elders. Although the practice was outlawed by the church many years later, the fact is it happened. I still stand by the fact that Joseph Smith was a sadist and that is how that practice got started. He took it onto himself to make sure that first born was pure mormon. Do you really think your church is going to tell people that? don't follow so blindly that which you do not know. I have read the book of mormon and studied it many years, was married to one for a while too. I know that when faced with clear evidence of Joseph Smiths debotcherous ways and lies and claims by ex-mormons, I was shortly divorced and sent away. The fact is, mormonism is a cult and it was started on a lie. Joseph Smith was not sent from god, he created his own religion and I still can't believe it stuck.

You appear to have misunderstood the reason why I cite 2 Pet 1:20,21, so allow me to clarify. I cite it not because I am privately interpreting any Scripture (or, if you disagree, would you care to point out where I'm doing that? the Scriptures cited need no "interpreting" for they are quite straightforward)... but rather to show how God's Word is just that... God's inspired Word.

What Peter asserts should give us full confidence that we are indeed reading God's open letter to mankind (despite the fact it was penned by men). If you have faith that there exists a God and that he has communicated with mankind via a permanent written record -the Bible-, then why would you doubt His ability to preserve it? It appears, friend, that you have allowed yourself to be dissuaded by so-called experts and other would-be intellectuals who's only intention is to undermine God's Word and to get people to doubt it.

Why not focus on the many aspects that make the Bible unique... e.g., how we can get to know God and what pleases/displeases Him, how its THE best-seller of all time (nothing comes even close), how it provides practical advice that we can use today, how miraculous a thing it is for the Bible even to be available for us today (in whole or in part in more languages than ever) especially given the fact many throughout history have attempted to destroy it, etc.?

I honestly have no desire to antagonize you or anybody else reading these posts - that would accomplish nothing and would not benefit either of us. I merely wish to point out how God's Word is worthy of our full trust. And, by the way, no... I don't worship the Bible (that's kinda silly - how exactly would one do that anyway?), only its author.