It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mormons Have World's Largest Database on Human Race: Why?

page: 13
41
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigrex

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Just out of curiosity, why does the Mormon faith put any more credence in Joseph Smith, than say, David Koresh?

They both claimed to have the inside track to heaven.

I'm not religious, but I wonder about this.

If the Mormons believe in Jesus Christ, I would think Jesus would have related all this information (the Book of Mormon) the first time he was here, instead of coming back and giving only Joseph Smith the lowdown as an afterthought.

I have no beef with Mormons (other than them knocking on my door too early in the morning), but I've often wondered about such things.


The Book of Mormon is considered to be another testament of Christ by the LDS faith. Mormons believe the resurrected Christ also visited the Americas after his death in Jerusalem. This visit is covered in the Book of Mormon. It is a scripture which details the fleeing of Jerusalem shortly before the Babylonian destruction around 597 BC. A portion also covers an older group of people that left the old world at the confounding of the tower of Babel. These records were not had in the old world. Mormons request people pray to God to know if it is true after reading it cover to cover, until that is done with an open mind, one should not prematurely judge the contents.

Mormons put more credence into Joseph Smith because of the teachings of the Church and the Book of Mormon.


Ok, that's cool. I'm the first to admit I don't know # about Mormonism.

I just thought it weird that if one believes in Jesus, and that he was divine, wouldn't have he have imparted this information while he was here on earth, while he was teaching the parables and whatnot?

Anyways, thanks for the information. I'm not looking for a religion, but it's always good to learn why people believe as they do.


edit on 14-12-2010 by Darkrunner because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
i am baptised in the church of england. not sure but i think this means im anglican. my church was formed so that the king of england could divorce his wife and marry someone else. so who would i be to pass judgement on a church that has good moral values as its corner stone.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Not really the same. Koresh claimed to be Christ. Smith claimed to be talked to by Angels.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by thrustbucket

That being said, I would be happy to answer any questions from anyone here that has legitimate questions or concerns they want to clear up about something they heard. I have no dog in this race and I will give you the straight answer whether it be positive or negative towards the LDS church.

. Ask away.


I see that in my absence you have attempted to hijack my thread by soliciting yourself as an expert on answers concerning Mormons. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT DOCTRINE...so stop trying to twist it. Although most of the Mormon doctrine is not based in reality, that is not the intended subject of this thread.

If you wish to solicit yourself as an expert, I suggest you start your own thread on the subject.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Not really the same. Koresh claimed to be Christ. Smith claimed to be talked to by Angels.


That's sort of an understatement. Smith made many wild and contradictory claims. He claimed to have met Jesus, and God the Father (separate twin-like gods), and some say that Smith even claimed to be descended from Jesus, which would put him way ahead of the Da Vinci Code.

Smith said, "No man knows my history." I'm just speculating, but I think if they had let him live much longer, he would have declared himself Christ somehow, he was heading that way.

And when you say Smith claimed angel(s) spoke to him, you're right on there. In fact, the evidence seems to show that the official Mormon story of Moroni being the angel actually morphed from originally being Nephi.

Anyway, I do see a whole lot of things being said here that veer pretty far off-topic, but I would like to say that this Mormon genealogy preoccupation might just have quite a bit to do with perhaps taking the line of Christ "back" as far as they can, and seeing "who" is related to Jesus. The ridiculous fallacy here would be the presumption that Smith was indeed in Christ's line, but once you have a married Jesus, anything's possible.

No, this is not an "official" Mormon teaching, but there are Mormons talking about this (Vern Swanson wrote a book about it), and like many things regarding this group, there's usually more than meets the eye.

Again, just submitting this notion in good faith so-to-speak, about yet another reason "why" Mormons might consider genealogical info important.

JR



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Not really the same. Koresh claimed to be Christ. Smith claimed to be talked to by Angels.


That's cool.

My point in that statement was to say anyone could claim to have some secret info from angels/God. What was it about Joseph Smith that made people follow him?

Did they all see the angel/angels along with him?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea

Originally posted by thrustbucket

That being said, I would be happy to answer any questions from anyone here that has legitimate questions or concerns they want to clear up about something they heard. I have no dog in this race and I will give you the straight answer whether it be positive or negative towards the LDS church.

. Ask away.


I see that in my absence you have attempted to hijack my thread by soliciting yourself as an expert on answers concerning Mormons. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT DOCTRINE...so stop trying to twist it. Although most of the Mormon doctrine is not based in reality, that is not the intended subject of this thread.

If you wish to solicit yourself as an expert, I suggest you start your own thread on the subject.


Obviously - you missed Thrustbucket's apology.

However - your own post seems to have an underlying negativity toward Mormons - - that has nothing to do with the OP either.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ianmoone1

Again that shouldn’t worry you as Joe Citizen… Unless:-

Unless some One World Government wants to introduce RFID chips for the worlds population!

Using these vast databases TPTB will be able to have your chip pre programmed with all of your data including DNA and even finger prints, eye retina, ear shape and so on, even if you’ve never been in trouble with the law – it will be possible to generate your complete profile from known data on family members, is enough to start piecing the whole jigsaw puzzle together.


CLDS will get paid $millions (they already are) for using their religious zealot volunteers for compiling this vast & important enslavement tool for mankind genealogy database!.

Those unwitting zealots don’t even know that they are being used as part of this monstrous plan against humankind with their religious fervor and desire to do volunteer work ‘on behalf of God”.

If they REALLY knew who it is they are working for they would throw themselves prostrate on the ground and beg forgiveness. Sit in sack cloth with ashes on their heads!

This is a diabolical new world order plot and it will be the basis for genetically engineered plague viruses designed to eliminate large numbers of mankind while NOT being effective “against the chosen ones”.

Avoiding 'the mark of the beast' will soon become basically impossible, for anyone in society with a tax file number, social security number, drivers license, job etc

Short of successfully faking your own death (and their are ways) and dropping off the electronic radar, with CASH and a hideaway cave in the mountains somewhere – your just about screwed in essence.

Now does anyone see the import of this genealogical data and why it has to be computerized?

The combination of databases & power of computing, will be the ordinary citizens undoing!

People give theirs and their families data to these genealogical web sites as a “hobby” (often without obtaining permission from the family members) or out of a misguided sense of religious fervor!

Did anyone notice “face book” the social networking site has just added a new feature identifying your relatives online?

The data is being methodically gathered and many are being paid big $ to gather it – the BIG CON is in getting people to provide that data for free as a hobby or for fun!

Once it is being used against you and you find yourself implanted against your will with RFID chips……..it will be too late, to enter the Kingdom of God in Heaven.





I think parts of this video (posted below) take your information presented here a little bit farther to show us the meaning of it all and the eventual outcome. Jordan Maxwell has some fabulous material on his website exposing many of the cultic meanings of various religions and other operations that are and have been on-going on this planet.

This is a long video interview and is well worth watching. The New Dawn begins around the thirty minute mark. The excerpts I am quoting start around the 40 minute mark.


Destiny of the Human Family: A Whole New Civilization

The agenda of this "One Who is to Come"....is to mutate the human race.
It's not necessarily evolution. Evolution has it's place in the world; there are things which do evolve. Obviously man did not evolve from monkeys---man is evolving into monkeys---THAT is the problem!
There is a place for evolution but that is not what I'm talking about.

This ancient story coming from the ancient and prehistoric world has dominated all the cultures of the world. What that implies, I believe, is that there is going to be some kind of a mutation of the human race in order to take the human family on the earth to a new style of life in the universe.

What will be lost will be your humanity---your ability to show love and kindness to other people. There will be no room for that!
Emotions? There will be no room for emotions.
No room for the American system of freedom, liberty, justice for all---that's out! That's gone.
There will be no more family love, humanity, man reacting to man---no."

----Jordan Maxwell

...



I think we all need to take a hard look at this agenda and the reasons for it. The key is what he said about man evolving INTO monkeys. We have been given the capability of emotions in our perfect creation and design and mankind has misused this ability for negative purposes. The darkside of emotions has taken over most people. They betray one another; have no feeling or consideration for others because they are basically selfish and greedy and ego based. They love to oppress others because it gives them the ego strokes of superiority and the rush of the illusion of power. Winning is everything. Getting over on people by using deception is a thrill; this is how most people come to be p*wned. The list goes on. People have misused their "gifts" of emotions. So I can understand why there would be a necessity to robotize the majority of society.







edit on 14-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkrunner

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Not really the same. Koresh claimed to be Christ. Smith claimed to be talked to by Angels.


That's cool.

My point in that statement was to say anyone could claim to have some secret info from angels/God. What was it about Joseph Smith that made people follow him?

Did they all see the angel/angels along with him?



I would suggest he was charismatic.

Mohammed also claimed to have special knowledge given by God and spoke to angels. His followers now number close to a billion.

A good striking story and a bit of charisma apparently goes a LONG ways.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Darkrunner

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Not really the same. Koresh claimed to be Christ. Smith claimed to be talked to by Angels.


That's cool.

My point in that statement was to say anyone could claim to have some secret info from angels/God. What was it about Joseph Smith that made people follow him?

Did they all see the angel/angels along with him?



Some did record experiences in temples, personal witnesses continue, Smith's not the only to ever claim visitation during the whole history of the Mormon Church, he did have more contact though to establish or re-establish some things for the final time.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea

Strange, too, how the recent census does not ask for your name and yet all the previous census records put together the names with the data.


I refused the census this time around and they apparently couldn't find me 10 years ago because I never saw or heard from them 10 years ago.

How accurate could these records really be?
edit on 14-12-2010 by In nothing we trust because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:07 AM
link   
"The greatest responsibility in this world, that God has laid upon us, is to seek after our dead. This doctrine was the burden of the scriptures.(History of the Church 4:426)

The first proxy baptisms began in 1840.

"But in January 1841, when the Saints were making plans for the Nauvoo Temple, the Lord declared: “A baptismal font there is not upon the earth, that they, my saints, may be baptized for those who are dead—for this ordinance belongeth to my house,"

Apparently, this "Lord" is making an appearance or is authoring some new texts. Who is "the Lord" and what is his method of declaration? Is this someone just making claims of hearing voices? Is this a man's idea to execute an agenda and sell it to people based on the presumptuous idea that "God told me so." How is "Lord" defined? Is this supposed to be an incarnated Jesus? The creator himself? A ghost? An alien being? "The Lord" seems to be a multi-purpose ambiguous term in many instructions being relayed to the following masses. Is this non-defined reference "the Lord" used as a way to make god and Jesus interchangeable entities? Or is "the Lord" a human being Master slave holder who lives in the Big House?

The key may be in the use of the words "belongeth to my house". Those old elite Ruling Families who were "Lords" over our ancestors and who actually owned them through serfdom and the feudal systems in place, are often referred to as Houses. The Houses are the Ruling Families. Could it be possible that various religions and organizations were established by and belong to specific Ruling Houses?


Records began to be kept in 1842. "...the Prophet recorded the following instructions from the Lord: “When any of you are baptized for your dead, let there be a recorder..." Again, some "Lord" is giving orders for this.

According to what Jordan Maxwell has said in the above video (somewhere around the thirty minute mark)
"So many people have bought into the different religious orders---Jehovah Witnesses, Christadelphia, World Wide Church of God, Mormon church----all of these are part and parcel of a larger world movement that has been planned for a long time."

So it would seem that each Ruling House is behind the specific functions of each little Bee Hive religion. Each has a task and eventually all these various records will be merged together. Not only does each religion have some specific objective to accomplish for the NWO purpose, but I speculate that each group has been subject to various techniques of experimental mind control and behavior modification.

"In December 1840 Joseph Smith wrote to members of the Quorum of the Twelve and other priesthood leaders who were serving missions in Great Britain..."

Did Smith receive his "Lord" instructions from the "Quorum of the Twelve"? Sounds Illuminati to me.



"The greatest responsibility in this world that god has laid upon us is to seek after our dead." Joseph Smith

Seeking after the dead is called "necromancy" and the bible scriptures strictly prohibit this. In order for a dead person to accept or reject a proxy baptism, the ghost would have to be made aware of this in some manner. To be made aware of making such a decision, the spirit of the dead would have to be summoned or contacted.

Summoning the dead is also strictly forbidden in bible scriptures. Not because it can really be done, but because it is a lie and a trick of shamans and is an abomination.

Necromancy was widespread in Western antiquity with records of practice in Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and Rome.

I suspect that this baptism of the dead is some type of occult summoning ritual.






In the wake of inconsistencies of judgment, necromancers, sorcerers and witches were able to utilize spells with holy names with impunity, as biblical references in such rituals could be construed as prayers as opposed to spells. As a result, the necromancy discussed in the Munich Manual is an evolution of these understandings. It has even been suggested that the authors of the Munich Manual knowingly designed this book to be in discord with understood ecclesiastical law.The main recipe employed throughout the necromancy manual used the same religious language and names of power alongside demonic names.

In the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, it is stated that::Of all human opinions that is to be reputed the most foolish which deals with the belief in Necromancy,...

An Encyclopedia of Occultism[16] states:

.... Considerable difference of opinion exists among modern adepts as to the exact methods to be properly pursued in the necromantic art, and it must be borne in mind the necromancy, which in the Middle Ages was called sorcery, shades into modern spiritualistic practice. There is no doubt, however, that necromancy is the touchstone of occultism, for if, after careful preparation the adept can carry through to a successful issue, the raising of the soul from the other world, he has proved the value of his art.

en.wikipedia.org...



According to Bible scripture, the dead know nothing and they have no further reward! They have no memory nor any involvement of things that are on-going on this planet.

"For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know nothing more, neither have they a reward any more: for the memory of them is forgotten." (Ecclesiastes 9:5) (This does not mean OUR memory of them, but that THEIR memory of things earthly is no more.)


My conclusion in this is that this preposterous idea of baptizing the dead, which directly opposes standards put forth in both the Old and New Testament, was done for the purpose of making records on people which leads toward an occult evil agenda which is now coming to fruition. As Maxwell said, these methods of implementation have been well thought out and have been on going toward building this agenda for a very long time.

One thing very important for all to note is that the methodology that is always used is to present a benefit through a silent deception. This is true for every contract you have signed. And "baptism" is a contract.




edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: cut video



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea


Seeking after the dead is called "necromancy" and the bible scriptures strictly prohibit this. In order for a dead person to accept or reject a proxy baptism, the ghost would have to be made aware of this in some manner. To be made aware of making such a decision, the spirit of the dead would have to be summoned or contacted.


Those of the Mormon faith don't seek to summon spirits, doctrine states that the spirit has the opportunity to accept or reject the baptism on the other side. Mormons believe the work recorded on earth is accessible in the spirit world.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 01:51 AM
link   
I've been following this thread for a bit, thought I'd finally chime in with some LDS perspective on the original topic ;P

One of the main scriptural motivations behind genealogy is found in the Old Testament. Malachi 4 is a short (6 verse) chapter relating to the last days and the second coming of the Lord.


Malachi 4:6
And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

source

Putting all the conspiracy aside and suspending disbelief for just a moment, the LDS church's hearts do appear to be turning to their fathers. What's more, they are providing vast resources free of charge to anyone else who also desires to turn their hearts to their fathers.

Baptism for the dead is a somewhat related topic to the OP, as the genealogical records are a key component in organizing and carrying out the baptisms. Paul argued for the doctrine of resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, and as one of his many points was this:


29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

source

So it seems that this practice isn't unique to the LDS church, but rooted in antiquity and lost to time.

Conceptually, this is my view on baptism for the dead:
Throughout the scriptures we read that baptism is a requirement of salvation. That is why some form of baptism is performed in most Christian faiths. For example:


Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

source

Note that to be saved there are two distinct rules: Believe, and be baptized. Two be damned though, there is just one. Nonbelief. So that begs the question: What about one who believes, but has not been baptized? This is the driving force behind baptism for the dead. We accept that baptism is a requirement of salvation, and those who believe, who haven't been baptized while on earth can still receive this requirement through a living proxy.

Now here's the key part: Does God care what the name of this or that church may be? In heaven, will everyone be "Mormon"? I say no. With all my heart, I believe it is solely about truth. The truth I am referring to isn't something tangible and testable...it's spiritual and moral. Examples of what I am talking about might be honesty, integrity, service, humility.
Does the LDS church have a corner on the truth market? No. Truth can be found all over the planet, in personal meditation to ornate cathedrals to the mountaintops of Tibet. When we die, if we are presented with the reality of the spiritual world, we will recognize it as truth if we have searched for it in our lives. If we have not, then it will be foreign, and our hearts won't be able to embrace it.

Another example: A farmer 1000 years ago in China. He lived a good life. He never drank too much, was honest in all his dealings, loved and honored his family, helped his neighbors when he could without thought of reward. He taught his children to be moral and honest. He died having never heard the name "Christ" and was of course unbaptized.
There are faiths that feel this man is sadly resigned to Hell. The LDS church does not.
He lived a life seeking after and practicing moral truths. When he crosses over and is presented with what is, he will know it in his heart because he has tried to be in tune with it his entire life. Now he "believes"...but yet requires baptism in order to be fully saved. (Which is a whole other discussion.)

This is the purpose and motivation behind baptism for the dead, to provide the means for all willing souls to be saved through Christ.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by blamethegreys
Baptism for the dead is a somewhat related topic to the OP, as the genealogical records are a key component in organizing and carrying out the baptisms. Paul argued for the doctrine of resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, and as one of his many points was this:


29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

source

So it seems that this practice isn't unique to the LDS church, but rooted in antiquity and lost to time.


It seems that the quote you used above is one of the standard items the Mormons are taught to parrot in defense of their doctrines. Here is the "rest of the story" as Paul Harvey would say. Below is what has been left out of the equation and what is not being fully told. What do you think is more sinful---an outright lie or a convenient omission?






...a study of Christian antiquities reveals that baptism for the dead was not practiced by the first followers of Jesus and had a very different meaning from that given to it by Joseph Smith Jr.

The article “Did Jesus Establish Baptism for the Dead?” (www.irr.org/mit/baptdead.html) by Luke P. Wilson elsewhere on this website discusses 1 Corinthians 15.29, which is the verse Mormons cite for support of their practice. At page 4 of 14 Wilson states “as we shall see, baptism for the dead is linked by the apostle [Paul] to an errant group within the Corinthian church, whose false teaching the entire fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians—including verse 29 aims to correct.” At pages 7 and 8 he identifies them with “false teachers”, without going into great depth about the cults they represent or their background teachings. The present article expands upon some of Wilson’s points and gives details about them as evidenced in ancient Christian sources close in time and geography to these teachers.

www.irr.org...



This idea of baptism by proxy for the dead is actually an invention that is is meant to be in defiance of Rome and the Papacy. It is a Catholic edict that the unbaptized cannot be received in the Kingdom of God. It is Rome's decree that if a baby dies before baptism that it will die with the smear of original sin. These harsh, unfeeling, manipulative edicts are probably cause for establishing such countermeasures as baptism for the dead as an act of comfort. The entire concept of baptism seems to be based in pagan superstition and manipulation.

The doctrine of Rome which is followed by all religions, cults, and secret societies, is that one may be ritually baptized no matter how ignorant or immoral they are, as long as they pledge loyalty to faith in the church and obedience to it's doctrines and dictates, and give up their minds and conscience to the direction of the priests and religious leaders (no independent thinking). Converts are made by the millions based on ritualistic practices without any real instruction, usually in complete ignorance of any truth of principles being established, and based on submission to Rome. (All religions, cults, and secret societies connect to Rome. A pledge of submission to your particular faith is ultimately a vow to Rome.)

The very act of baptism is rooted in pagan antiquity and was in practice long before John the Baptist or Jesus ever came on the scene.The doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration is Babylonian. In the Chaldean mysteries, the first requirement before any instruction could be received, was to have the initiate submit to a baptism as a confirmation that he would swear blind obedience.

Baptism--Reborn


Even today, many people are baptized into churches, organizations, cults, etc. without knowing many of the particulars of that "faith". Sometimes the inner secrets are withheld from the new converts and it is only later, after their sworn allegiance that they discover there are severe punishments for not following instructions of church leaders. Some later find that financial expectations of them were not disclosed. This offering of benefits through deceptions is the Trade Mark of Rome.

Again, we see this distinct benefit/deception through "free genealogy records" being offered and gradually uncovering a truth as to the real sinister reasons behind it that may be used in the most detrimental manner to totally enslave the human population.





edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by JR MacBeth

And when you say Smith claimed angel(s) spoke to him, you're right on there. In fact, the evidence seems to show that the official Mormon story of Moroni being the angel actually morphed from originally being Nephi.

JR



I think you got it backwards, JR.
According to what I found it was originally Moroni and later changed to Nephi.
I wonder if "Nephi" is short for Nephilim. Hmmm.....I sense an ET conspiracy coming on!!!




Initially, Smith merely referred to "an angel" without identifying its name. Thus, in an 1831 letter from Lucy Mack Smith to her brother, she discusses Moroni as the person who buried the plates, but does not identify him as the unnamed "holy angel" that gave Smith the means to translate the golden plates (Morgan 1986, p. 349). In Smith's 1832 history, he said he was visited by "an angel of the Lord", who mentioned the Book of Mormon prophet "Maroni" as the last engraver of the golden plates; however, Smith's account did not say whether or not the angel was referring to himself as Moroni (Smith 1832, p. 4).

In 1835, Smith identified the angel as Moroni:

However, on May 2, 1838, a few months before Smith's statement in Elders' Journal, Smith began dictating a church history that included a detailed account of his visits from the angel (Smith 1838a, p. 7). Smith seems to have identified the angel as "Nephi", which is the name of the Book of Mormon's first narrator (Smith 1838a, p. 5).

en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea

Originally posted by thrustbucket

That being said, I would be happy to answer any questions from anyone here that has legitimate questions or concerns they want to clear up about something they heard. I have no dog in this race and I will give you the straight answer whether it be positive or negative towards the LDS church.

. Ask away.


I see that in my absence you have attempted to hijack my thread by soliciting yourself as an expert on answers concerning Mormons. THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT DOCTRINE...so stop trying to twist it. Although most of the Mormon doctrine is not based in reality, that is not the intended subject of this thread.

If you wish to solicit yourself as an expert, I suggest you start your own thread on the subject.


It's odd that you have allowed your thread to be hijacked by AT LEAST 2/3 of the posts describing mormons or making statements about mormons that are factually incorrect and usually negative (probably because you are doing so yourself) - but as soon as someone comes in that knows what they are talking about and tries to correct some of the facts, you attack them?

I'm sorry if you want promote lies and half-truths for your personal crusade and agenda against a religion while trying to censor the other side, but that's not the way it works around here.

ProTip: Any time you start a thread examining or criticizing any aspect of a real religion - expect the thread to devolve into doctrinal discussion.
edit on 15-12-2010 by thrustbucket because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by JR MacBeth

..., the "priestly pillar" you mention, Jachin, also is spelled "Joachim", and tradition holds that he was the Virgin Mary's Father, Jesus' grandfather.











Jeconiah...Latin: Joachin, also known as Coniah and as Jehoiachin
was a king of Judah who reigned from c.600 - March 15 or 16 597 BCE

Jeconiah was the son of Jehoiakim with Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.[18] He had at least seven children: Shealtiel, Malkiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah. (1 Chronicles 3:17-18) Matthew 1:11 lists Josiah as the father of Jeconiah: "Josiah became the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the Babylonian exile." It has been suggested that the word "son" here should be taken in the sense of "grandson," since 2 Kings 24:6 says his father was Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah. A list of his descendants is given in 1 Chronicles 3:17-24.


Jeremiah (22:28-30) cursed Jeconiah that none of his descendants would ever sit on the throne of Israel:

Thus says the LORD: 'Write this man down as childless, A man who shall not prosper in his days; For none of his descendants shall prosper, Sitting on the throne of David, And ruling anymore in Judah.'"

Jeconiah is one of the kings mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew, and after Jeconiah the genealogical line continues through his son, Shealtiel. Jeconiah does not feature as one of the blood-ancestors of Jesus in Luke's genealogy which follows the line from Nathan (son of David) to Heli. (This is His mother's ancestry.) However, because of this curse upon Jeconiah, Joseph would never be able to sit upon the throne of David, nor have any of his blood-descendants sit upon the throne of David.

en.wikipedia.org...




edit on 15-12-2010 by Alethea because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by 777isall
 


My only point was to read it to try and understand...not change your own feelings. And knowledge...even negative... can be a good thing if in the end it strengthens your own faith and convictions about what you believe.

Ive read books from every major religion. And it helped me understand my own faith and beliefs. If I hadnt been exposed to the differences, I dont think I would be as tolerant of others as I am today.

I even once looked through that crazy "Satanic Bible" and Hitler's "Mein Kamp"...and all it did was make me more aware, I chuckled a little...and it only strengthened my faith even more.

PS I dont want to get into what anyone should or shouldnt read...but the world should not be a place like "Fahrenheit 451"...wher we burn all the books..........
edit on 06-10-2010 by mysterioustranger because: PS add



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 




According to what I found it was originally Moroni and later changed to Nephi. I wonder if "Nephi" is short for Nephilim. Hmmm.....I sense an ET conspiracy coming on!!!


I like the way you think Alethea!

As far as what came first, Nephi, Moroni, Maroni or macaroni, I think the point is, Smith "should" have little credibility when there is any question at all about such a central figure in his religion.

Obviously, today's Mormon Church has accepted Moroni, over Nephi, which is why we find Moroni on top of their temples. Clearly, it makes less sense than Nephi would, considering who Nephi is in the Book of Mormon, but wait a few decades, they might just change it back.

Great thread by the way, I've starred a number of your posts. I think you're trying to maintain fairness, in spite of what some are saying, my hat is off to you, it has got to be a challenge when it comes to this group.

JR




top topics



 
41
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join