The things I have noticed about LDS, and Islam.

[Cow Poke]

I just thought about it.

It's like you as a parent teach your kids that it's better to avoid cola drinks as the sugar and caffeine are habit forming, and that leads to health and problems. But you sell chocolate and cola drinks at a store you own. And then just before dying you have a red bull drink, but your kids still love you, but others can call you a hypocrite for what you just did.

Interesting. So you're admitting, in effect -- in a very round about way -- that Smith was, indeed, a hypocrite, but it's OK because you love him?

The problem with this, OC, is that alcohol was a VERY SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM at the time, which is WHY Smith came up with this "stay away from it" teaching. Even Emma had the common sense to point out that the "head of a religious body" should not be involved with alcohol. He should have spent more time listening to her, and less time threatening her destruction. Even Pilate listened to HIS wife.

Jesus' mission to suffer and die was for a completely different purpose than Joseph's.

AMEN! Jesus came to seek and to save, to serve and to heal, and Smith came to be "the big guy in charge" -- prophet, Lt. Genearal, Grand Poobah, Mayor, Presidential Candidate....

Circumstances were different too.

But you refuse to acknowledge this when you claim that "former followers of Christ" TODAY turned against Jesus for the SAME REASONS that his friends did.

If Joseph had been led along in a death march procession, and then procedurally hung by a rope or nailed to a cross, the results may have been different then they were in the circumstance of being charged upon and having friends nearby whose lives were also being threatened, and watching a brother being shot before your eyes and the same fate in store for all of the others in the jail.

Oh PULEEZE, OC... he ordered drinks for his buddies AND for the jailers, and was smoking and drinking, having APPARENTLY ordered his own militia to come rescue him, which MAY be why he accepted the handgun that was smuggled to him.... The "official Mormon version" of Smith's death is so incredibly whitewashed and DIFFERENT than what actually happened.... yet you'll close your eyes and plug your ears and see it as a "martyrdom" of the highest order....

If Smith had been in jail for preaching the Gospel instead of scamming and hoodwinking and cheating his own followers.... Jesus was SINLESS when he was crucified... Smith ... some of his OWN angry former followers were part of the mob.

[Cow Poke]

This was a test of loyalty, and after determining their loyalty, Joseph revealed that he was only testing their loyalty. Polygamy served as an Abramic-Isaac type of test for these early church leaders who obeyed.

Furthermore, Joseph Smith would not permit other members’ sexual misconduct. For example, he refused to countenance John C. Bennett’s serial infidelities.306 If Joseph was looking for easy access to sex, Bennett–mayor of Nauvoo, First Councilor in the First Presidency, and military leader–would have been the perfect confederate. Yet, Joseph publicly denounced Bennett’s actions, and severed him from the First Presidency and the Church. Bennett became a vocal opponent and critic, and all this could have been avoided if Joseph was willing to have him as a “partner in crime.” The critic cannot argue that Joseph felt that only he was entitled to polygamous relationships, since he went to great efforts to teach the doctrine to Hyrum and the Twelve, who embraced it with much less zeal than Bennett would have. If this is all about sex, why did Joseph humiliate and alienate Bennett, who he should have known he could trust to support him and help hide polygamy from critics, while risking the support of the Twelve by insisting they participate?

OC! Bennett was, from all apparent records, a SNAKE that Smith gave HIGH OFFICE to! Why? Because men of leadership "were in short supply" --- because Smith had sent all his leadership on MISSIONS, and had his hand in being mayor, Lt. General, Hotel operator, Bar owner..... and Smith was complaining about needing help running the "temporalities" so he could focus on the "spiritualties". Bennett was a snake of SMITH'S OWN CHOOSING in a LEADERSHIP CRISIS of Smith's OWN MAKING!

Bennett was SMITH's BUDDY!

[Sparko]

Both LDS and Islam deny the trinity (or redefine it out of existence) - in fact this is great indicator of a cult. Most cults will attack the trinity and turn Jesus into just a human, or at best an angel or "another" god.

[nrajeff]

Both LDS and Islam deny the trinity (or redefine it out of existence) -

Unless it was Trinitarianism--the original cult--that denied or redefined out of existence, Tripartite monolatry.

[Cerebrum123]

Unless it was Trinitarianism--the original cult--that denied or redefined out of existence, Tripartite monolatry.

Care to give sources to back that up?

[Sparko]

Unless it was Trinitarianism--the original cult--that denied or redefined out of existence, Tripartite monolatry.

since that concept didn't exist until 2000 years later, I seriously doubt that was the case.

[nrajeff]

Care to give sources to back that up?

What sources need to be cited to support the idea that IF Trinitarianism denied or redefined tripartite monolatry out of existence, then it was Trinitarianism that is the abomination? I never asserted that such was the case---I suggested the possibility, and of course there is that possibility. But in case you are unfamiliar with the scholarship on the topic, I will provide some after I direct you to alleged similarities between Calvinistic Evangelicalism and Islam.

[Cerebrum123]

What sources need to be cited to support the idea that IF Trinitarianism denied or redefined tripartite monolatry out of existence, then it was Trinitarianism that is the abomination? I never asserted that such was the case---I suggested the possibility, and of course there is that possibility. But in case you are unfamiliar with the scholarship on the topic, I will provide some after I direct you to alleged similarities between Calvinistic Evangelicalism and Islam.

Well, the Bible would be a start, so would anything older than Joseph Smith that mentions said "tripartite monolatry". Also, Calvinism is only so similar to Islam as far as predestination goes, the similarity ends there, and I'm not sure it's even that similar.

[Hamster]

Where's the first century tripartite monolatry?

[Cerebrum123]

Where's the first century tripartite monolatry?

What he said.

[nrajeff]

What he said.

Didn't that already get covered in a thread, quite a while ago?

Anyway:

"The Mosaic religion was initially a monolatrous religion; while the Hebrews are enjoined to worship no deity but Yahweh, there is no evidence that the earliest Mosaic religion denied the existence of other gods. In fact, the account of the migration contains numerous references by the historical characters to other gods, and the first law of the Decalogue is, after all, that no gods be put before Yahweh, not that no other gods exist. While controversial among many people, most scholars have concluded that the initial Mosaic religion for about two hundred years was a monolatrous religion...."

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...Monolatry.html


"Classical monotheism
Religion of Israel and Judaism

There may be some reason to speak of the conception of God found in the Hebrew Scriptures as monolatry rather than as monotheism, because the existence of other gods is seldom explicitly denied and many times even acknowledged....."
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ions#ref420855

So, it seems fairly well supported that OT Israel knew of, and at times practiced, monolatry. Next I will try to find you some evidence that it existed in the 1st century as well, and may have competed within Christianity as one of the contenders for the correct theology of Christianity.

[Cerebrum123]

Didn't that already get covered in a thread, quite a while ago?

Anyway:

"The Mosaic religion was initially a monolatrous religion; while the Hebrews are enjoined to worship no deity but Yahweh, there is no evidence that the earliest Mosaic religion denied the existence of other gods. In fact, the account of the migration contains numerous references by the historical characters to other gods, and the first law of the Decalogue is, after all, that no gods be put before Yahweh, not that no other gods exist. While controversial among many people, most scholars have concluded that the initial Mosaic religion for about two hundred years was a monolatrous religion...."

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...Monolatry.html


"Classical monotheism
Religion of Israel and Judaism

There may be some reason to speak of the conception of God found in the Hebrew Scriptures as monolatry rather than as monotheism, because the existence of other gods is seldom explicitly denied and many times even acknowledged....."
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ions#ref420855

So, it seems fairly well supported that OT Israel knew of, and at times practiced, monolatry. Next I will try to find you some evidence that it existed in the 1st century as well, and may have competed within Christianity as one of the contenders for the correct theology of Christianity.

This is only evidence of monolatry, and not tripartite monolatry, which was the term that you used. Besides, the early Hebrews were CONSTANTLY going after idols, and didn't always care very much about having the correct beliefs, that's not even close to how Christians in the first century were. The closest thing to what you need that you will find will probably be modalism, or some cult like Gnosticism.

[Hamster]

As you know, every time the early Jews worshiped other gods, Jehovah was known to celebrate.

And of course other gods exist. Caesar was a god, so were egyptian pharoahs. So were idols, statues, animals, rocks, and demons.

[Cerebrum123]

Both Islam and LDS have "Lying for the Lord". In Islam it is called taqqiyah.

If I am wrong on this one I am welcome to correction.

[nrajeff]

Both Islam and LDS have "Lying for the Lord". In Islam it is called taqqiyah.

If I am wrong on this one I am welcome to correction.

You are wrong on this one. I am willing to bet that you picked up the term from a source other than LDS--a source hostile to the LDS.