@@AdamEyers They are in the true restored church of Jesus Christ, and if you are looking somewhere else for them, or still looking for Elijah's return, you are looking in the wrong place!!!
Questions that come to mind while watching this video: 1. If things that were clearly taught by the prophet at General Conference cannot be considered authoritative and binding, then how can we trust anything said by today’s LDS prophets and apostles? 2. Though many will claim that these teachings were never “official” doctrine, it’s hard to imagine that anyone who loves the Lord could teach such wild speculations in any sort of official capacity. 3. If Latter-Day Saints are selective about which teachings they believe from their own prophets, then how can they expect others to take their prophets seriously? 4. If present-day prophets overrule past prophets, then how does the Latter-Day Saint know that today’s “truths” won’t be overruled by tomorrow’s prophet?
Just as a past prophet in the Bible is overuled by the next current prophet in the Bible e.g Adam is overrule by Abraham and then Abraham is overuled by Moses etc.
@@GLM So the law of Moses is not done away with after Jesus Christ's Atonement and Resurrection? Or do we all need get in line to board the ark because the prophet Noah is alive and expecting a flood? Or was God wrong when he told Abraham he would be a father of many nations? Or do we all need to be obedient so the Laihona will point in the right direction? Or do we all need to go on mass to gather to Utah? Or do we all need to still be reading the Bible in Latin? Or was Martin Luther The German Lawyer Monk wrong when he nailed his 95-Point Theses to the church doors in Wittenberg; if so we all should still be Roman Catholic? Or was Henry VIII wrong to break with the Roman Catholic church? Or was God wrong when he kicked out Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden?
I was taught all this back when I was growing-up in the Mormon church- 1950- 1969. I left in 2001. If I bring any of it up now I am labeled an anti-Mormon hater. Mormonism is a mess -- a mass of confusion. "God is not the author of confusion."
I was in the LDS faith from early 1980's ~ 2000's, and was taught all the same things. However in my time the violent gestures were removed in the endowment ceremony, and other changes were made. I honestly wish I had heard about the Tanners sooner, but never found any real information to learn about the Mormon history until much later after 2010.
@@grayman7208 No, God's word does not "change" but the minds of men create changes they want in order to conform to an ever changing world view. I should ask you if you have ever read the Bible, if so, then you would know that Jesus came into the world to show up that we could not keep the moral law that was given in the time of Moses, but Jesus who lived a perfect and sinless life, fulfilled the law, and brought us a new and everlasting covenant as was for shadowed by the prophets in the Old Testament.
The Lord adds line upon line and precepts upon precept, here a little and there a little. The whole history of Christianity is also a history of such development. Because Protestant churches are so fragmented and have huge confusion amongst one another, they don't really have any meaning for history or record-keeping. Hence it is almost impossible to go to the local Baptist Church and find records about what they may have talked about 200 or 300 years ago. So it is very easy to assume in a small church somewhere in the Midwest, that we have no confusion and we have never had any controversies. Because there are no people interested in trying to dig up anything about some local church of 150 people. And because most Protestant churches are fragmented into small units like these, no one has any incentive to really investigate their past teachings and their past actions and so on. Large organizations on the other hand are much easier to keep track of and look into their past. And when you have a huge historical record library, it is easy to be like the tanners and pervert whatever is being said in those records to serve your purpose. I one time did take these Tanner's claims of whatever the historical record says. Took the books and followed the sources, I noticed very quickly how bad the distortion was. They took passages from two different books and added them together to make it seem like they're talking about the same topic, and thus as if that was somehow an explanation of their own twisted interpretation. What's the difference of course with me, is that I am a student of History. I understand how history is made and how it can be interpreted and how it is used throughout different cultures. And with this I can see that Tanners would never be considered reliable historians if they wrote about any other topic except Mormonism. If their method of using the sources would be applied to the founding fathers or the history of the United States, today would be laughed and ridiculed publicly just like Fawn Brody was ridiculed and savaged by the historians of her time, when she tried to venture into the field of American history and tried to write a biography of Thomas Jefferson. But when she writes about Joseph Smith nobody seems to mind, yet her method With Smith was exactly the same as with Jefferson.
@@brotherinchrist72 "God's word does not "change" nonsense. reading the bible proves that. god's word changes throughout history as humans learned to follow his words. your example of christ fulfilling the law proves that. the sermon on the mount proves that. christ's commands to his followers proves that.
Growing up in the church, I learned about the Urim and Thummim. Young mormons today have never heard those words. So many things have changed and they will claim "that was never taught." It's infuriating!
Uh, no. NO. The church has never once claimed that any teaching about the Urim and Thummim never occurred. It is STILL doctrinally sound. Do you know why? Because it's the TRUTH! Take a church history class at a church owned university. You might find a few nuggets there which are official, but which you still nevertheless choose to DENY. It works in a similar fashion in a court of law. This is how guilty people often go free, and how innocent people like Trump get convicted. It's how THE WORLD operates - not how God operates.
You can blame the leaders of the church for misleading members. When I grew up in the 90s I totally believed in plates on the table and joseph smith running his fingers across them. Total lies.
i was taught about the ur and thummim in sunday school in the early 2010s, but my teacher said they were a pair of stones that were like glasses, never explained how they were used in the translation or anything, i was still under the impression it was a “normal” translation process until my shelf broke in 2020
Seer stones. Every heard of those ... ? That's what the Urimm and Thummim are. Tools of trade of prophets, seers, and revelators, as directed by God himself - the Alpha & Omega, the Great I AM - All the current shit you hear about the church is the SAME OLD SHIT as aways since decades past, but magnified by a factor of 10 + Trust me - this is surely NOTHING new. We're heard it all a jillion times.
I was born and raised LDS, but left last year after a couple of years deconstructing Mormonism. At the same time, Jesus led me to a wonderful Bible believing church where I have accepted Jesus! I have appreciated your videos along my journey. You are spot on about all of these former LDS teachings. Another doctrine that is changing is who in the godhead is worshiped. I was taught in Institute in the late 1990's that because LDS considered itself monotheistic only Heavenly Father was worshiped, but love and adoration were given to Jesus (Bruce R. McConkie taught this), but now there are statements from the church leaders (Elder Cook) and on the LDS website that Jesus is worshiped. Since Heavenly Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three individual people in Mormon theology worshiping more than one person in the Godhead is problematic because it is polytheism.
Wow - Praise God! Very encouraging. Yeah, we originally were going to do "10 things the LDS Church No Longer Teaches" - but it got too long ha. I'll probably do a "5 more things the LDS Church No Longer Teaches" eventually, and cover some of the things I cut.
Praise God that he lead you into all truths! Thank you for sharing your experience. I was involved in Mormonism from the early 1980's ~ 2000's and then fell away for a long time, but eventually opened the Bible and then was lead to a wonderful Christian church that teaches / preaches from the Bible alone, and found the true Jesus, and was saved. I just pray that more will have their eyes opened before it is too late.
I have a similar story. I was raised and at times throughout my life I was very devout in my faith as a LDS member and priesthood holder, but it all starting crumbling after a new missionary showed me the king follett discourse, I struggled with this for a couple of years and ultimately accepted it and explained it away and all was good but then I dug even deeper into the doctrine of the church became more active in church and responsibility around the ward until one day I had the idea of “the second anointing “ brought to my attention by a fellow member. This was yet another doctrine that I had to unpack and explain away to myself. Then I found the doctrine of blood atonement, and Jesus being a polygamist and I finally decided I needed to re read the Bible for myself but not through the eyes or influence of the church. I bought a new Bible off the internet and read the entire New Testament in two weeks and Jesus revealed himself to me, and allowed the scales to fall off my eyes and see the Lds church for what it was and now I have been baptized and joined a Bible believing Jesus preaching church where I serve in the worship team and have had a true born again experience, and met the true Jesus the savior of our world and the one true God, who came to this world completely God and completely man and died for our sins, so that we can have eternal life to glorify and worship him. And it is my personal call to spread this message to the world and help to get my family and anyone else I can away from this and other false religions who pervert the gospel and pose as ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing trying to lead souls to hell. Anyone on the fence about the lds church or the jehova witness church or the Roman Catholic Church, or anyone who doubts there is a God and wants to talk about who Jesus is, and how he will come to where you are and meet you, message me. I promise the gospel and good news that Jesus himself commissioned us to spread in the New Testament is real, and his grace is free to all, not by anything you can do, or because of anything you have done to earn or deserve it, but free to any who seeks to have a relationship with him and call and believe upon his name. The grace of Jesus Christ our lord is enough to save you. I am happy to converse with anyone who wants to know more about how.
@@jssparkman04 Thank you for such a powerful testimony! I can identify with many things you said and praise God every time someone has their eyes opened and they find the real Jesus Christ of the Bible.
I would bet money that any early Christian, Jew or Muslim, if transported to the modern day.. would not recognize their own religion. Changing is about the only thing every religion has in common
So has Christianity. It went from Priests must be celibate to ministers could be married. If you're not baptized before you die you'll be damned. To baptism is a work and works aren't needed. From homosexuality is among the worst of sins to now in some congregations having homosexuality clergy and so on.
This is a great video to pair with the last one! If the early teachings were taught by prophets but modern LDS people call it false doctrine then we can see that modern LDS people don’t see the earlier prophets aren’t really prophets.
The apologetic is that the living prophet has priority over past prophets. Also, they will say that sometimes the prophet speaks as a man and not as a prophet. This was actually taught by Joseph Smith, Jr. Unfortunately, you can never really know when he speaks as a man vs. as a prophet, and when he dies, his teachings become fair game to be completely disavowed.
No, what we see is the vast majority of Mormons do not care about what the past prophets "may" or may not have taught, and believe every cunning word play that the LDS church has learned to master craft and speak. They call past doctrines "theories" and they are at a point to where it no longer matters to them what past prophets may have taught, because they sugar coat with cunning words and explanation in their gospel topics they hand out. It's nothing more than corporate PR damage control.
I was born a raised in a fundamentalist Mormon group where these things are still taught. I can say that you represented these teachings very accurately and did so in a way that didn’t blow these things out of proportion. Being a fundamentalist group, they claim that the early prophets are correct and the new ones that reject those teaching are the false prophets. This video was well prepared and delivered.
@@brotherinchrist72 it's difficult to say. I no longer promote the beliefs. I have chosen to surrender these beliefs and have asked Jesus to fill the cup I once tried to fill on my own. I was raised in polygamy and have married two wives myself before God gave me an experience that radically changed me. Culturally, I am still a member, but I do not participate in the religious practices. This group still upholds all these beliefs that Brigham Young and others taught. The journals of discourses are treated like Scripture in many ways.
@@glennallred5510 I will continue to pray for you then, that the Lord will help guide you into all truths. I can't imagine what many of those experiences must have been like. Do you view the Bible as the word of God or is that still considered to have been corrupted and precious truths lost? I ask because that seems to be one of the bigger issues that many are vexed with when asked if they believe God can lie or fail, in which we know he cannot, and if God cannot lie or fail, then how can the Bible have ever been corrupted when God promised us his word would never fade away, and his Church would never fail.
@@brotherinchrist72 I appreciate the prayers. I need guidance. Yes, I Believe the Bible to be the word of God and 100% trust worthy. At this point I feel that God has told me to stay put, for reasons I'm not sure, but I hope it is to bring others to Christ.
If I may ask, how do you know you're not under another man made belief or whether it comes from God this time? meaning, what difference is there in the channels & source of doctrine from what you trusted then vs. now?
Another major teaching that was changed is who are the descendants of the Lamanites. Older editions of the Book of Mormon have in the introductory matter the statement that the Lamanites are the principle ancestors of the Native Americans. The current edition states the Lamanites are among the ancestors of the Native Americans.
The problem with this video is that all of the five points are not doctrines that were taught by the church. Adam-god theory it's called a theory because it was Brigham Young's own ideas that he brought up a few times. But which were contested by the other apostles and also the membership by large. Some of these beliefs may have been taught by individuals in various different circumstances and settings, but they were never doctrines taught by the whole church, nor have they been doctrines. It does not follow from the quotation you gave that Adam impregnated Mary. Since Brigham Young has very specifically made this point in other talks that Mary was a virgin. You are now making your own assumptions and forcing them into Brigham Young's ideas. But this does not change the fact that the church leadership contested this from the beginning, and this has never been taught as a doctrine apart from these few talks Young gave. When it comes to the marriage of Jesus, these are again opinions of some leaders of the church but this has never been taught as a doctrine in the church. How many church members even today believe that Jesus was married as did some of the early Christians also believe the same thing as we know from the Gospel of Philip for example. But one thing that all of those Mormons who do believe in this marriage, don't necessarily agree with, is that he was a polygamist. In fact most that I have discussed with those who believe that Jesus was married, do not believe that he was polygamist. And all accept that this is not a doctrine of the church. When it comes to interpreting the past in Mormonism, Protestants have a huge problem with their assumptions of Sola scriptura. They assume that whenever Mormon apostle says something that it is a scripture in Mormonism. But there is a very clear path that has to be taken before anything can become scripture. The 12 apostles have to agree unanimously on whatever is proposed as doctrine or scripture. This has never been done on any of these five points in this video. Several early Latter-Day saints leaders had unique perspectives on many things, it does not make those things doctrines. Those are things that people might have discussed and speculated about, but that is all it is. I have had views concerning Divinity and salvation, and those views have evolved and changed. What are the views I had 20 years ago, now I disagree with them. But there's one thing that has not changed, and that is the testimony about Jesus Christ that he is the only name under heaven by which man can be saved. About the necessity of the authority from God to build up his kingdom. The reality of the Book of Mormon. The power of prayer and personal revelation. These are the things that don't change in the church even if the application of policy can vary from time to time. Interpretations and speculations also have their own cultural and historical phenomenons. But that is exactly why there is a church in place, to keep these phenomena from taking over the church itself.
So you are saying that the curse of Cain was not taught as doctrine? If it wasn't doctrine, why was it necessary for a revelation from God to SWK (see declaration #2) to allow all worthy members the opportunities to obtain saving ordinances in the temple. This "doctrine" continued over 120 years. To call it a random opinion from a few leaders of the church is embarrassing.
@jaredite when you say, “they didn’t teach it as doctrine, they were only saying their opinions”, this mode of thinking creates several problems: 1. It fails to honor the test of a prophet as outlined in the Bible. The Bible doesn’t say, “If the prophet issues a teaching but it isn’t approved by his peers, then feel free to disregard.” Rather, it says, “But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak… that same prophet shall die.” 2. It gives the prophet a license to teach absolutely anything without repercussion. What if today’s prophet were to say that Jesus never had a resurrection? That would be heresy. But by your logic, he would merely be asserting his opinion. Someone can’t just come up with some wild idea about God with serious ramifications and start teaching it with reckless abandon, let alone a prophet who should fear the Lord above all else! 3. When a prophet speaks his opinion in an authoritative setting, he should qualify it as such. In these examples, we have the exact opposite situation given that Brigham said all of his sermons could be considered Scripture. A prophet who recklessly teaches his own wild opinions without qualifying them (especially when they are in direct opposition to Scripture) is a massive red flag when employing the fruit inspection test that Jesus talks about, and it certainly fails to meet the New Testament standard for church leaders as outline in Timothy, Titus, and Peter.
As a member of the LDS Church we were taught that everything that comes out of the mouth of the prophet is scripture. It is inspired of God. If that is true, then it must be treated as doctrine because the originator is God himself. That is what a prophet does, conveys the truth of God to us. Maybe it is not officially church doctrine, but it still has to be obeyed. Disobeying God's word brings consequences. But stating that something is not really LDS doctrine is a way for church leaders to explain away something that might be controversial or uncomfortable to deal with, or is later found to be false, or that they simply don't wish to confront it. in the end they don't want to know that their leaders are wrong because that would make their church wrong. As an aside, I never believed in the curse of Cain doctrine, although some who were biased against black people fully accepted it.
As a former member of the LDS Church, I've heard the idea that Jesus was married openly talked about from the point I joined in 1979 and up until I left in 2016. I heard it was a sin to marry outside of your race through the early 80s. As a Mormon, I was told the translation method of Joseph's Book of Mormon is that he used the plates and Urim and Thummim in all cases through the early 80s. Joseph's own seer stone in a hat idea came creeping in slowly until it evolved into the narrative that he didn't need the plates to translate the Book of Mormon at all.
The seer stone wasn’t an idea that came creeping in. That was a historical fact that the church was actively hiding until they realized they could no longer suppress that information.
Joseph Fielding Smith said the brown seer stone in a hat story is false , the official Church History Institute manual says it is sketchy. You left the church over hearsay and false rumors. You should have done your own research instead of believing written gossip.
JOSEPH ' S BOOK OF MORMON IS SATANIC, DECEIVING, FULL OF LIES, ETC. . SHAME ON HIM, JOSEPH?!? WHERE IS HE RIGHT NOW ? MORMONS , PLEASE CULTIVATE YOURSELVES . START READING " HOLY BIBLE "❤
The Book of Mormon is not historically accurate the Prophets are wolfs in sheep’s clothing with predatory practices people should not be adding in their baptism that they have to believe in Joseph smith being a prophet why is that a requirement for being baptized and why would they hold a member accountable if they realize is false and leaving the church once they decide is false baptism is for everyone again why punish one of your members that bring someone to be baptized and decides to change to a different church that is just despicable Russell Nelson has been caught telling lies often enough Mormon in Hebrew means more good no book in the Bible describes it’s self better than the other the Book of Mormon projects red flags even on its own Cover Tithing is a scam God does not want money he wants you to know him how me he loves you and wants your love remember what Jesus said about taxes Mormons are poor children being deceived sorry but wow broh you see a church that tells you to Tithe just run from it
Doesn't it bother them at all that they have NO source material? No actual Book of Mormon, and NO copies? There is NO source document of the witnesses. The godly thing to conclude is that they are not of God.
You can say the same thing about the gospels in the Bible. There are no original manuscripts for those. And all evidence points to the fact that they were all written, at a minimum, decades after the fact. There are a ton of other issues with the Gospels that bring their authenticity into question but you can easily look those up elsewhere. My point is, you are correct, the Mormon canon of scriptures are very hard to take seriously because of lack of primary sources. The same goes for the Bible.
@@squeakhawk01 That's not exactly true. At some point there was a source, which was copied over and over again with great care. In many instances, the people could contest the facts with actual witnesses. While it is true that we may no longer have or know the sources, most of the time they did. For instance, Noah was still alive when Abraham was born. And Noah knew many people who knew Adam. The time span between Joseph (son of Israel) and Miriam (Moses' sister) was less than a lifetime. Moses got God's "stamp of approval" and everyone could witness this. With Joseph Smith, we don't have anything like this at all. In fact, we have evidence of his shenanigans and his rejection of Christianity and their God.
@@ts-900 Sure. But those original documents were likely constructed from oral traditions. We are talking at least 2 to 3 generations of oral traditions before they were written down (not to mention that Matthew and Luke copy huge chunks of Mark). And since we are talking about Mormonism, consider all of the "miraculous" stories and legends that became established in the Mormon faith within the first and second generations of the LDS church. And that is WITH journals and contemporary documentation. In fact, the history of Mormonism is itself a giant case study on how the mythology and legends of the early Christian church could have developed, all without actual supernatural events.
@@squeakhawk01 That's not exactly true, either. We have words and phrases in those books which push back the time that they were written. First-hand witnesses would have been alive and there would have been evidences of the stories. First instance, some of the saints who rose again, or their relatives, could attest to being made alive in Christ. I cannot consider the "miraculous" stories and legends (of Mormonism) because I don't think I've heard of very many, if any. I have noticed that all such stories are devoid of Christ, or faith in God. So are they miraculous? I would say not. As far as I can tell, Mormonism is independent of Christianity and sees Christianity as corrupt. And yet it claims Christianity as its foundation.
@@squeakhawk01 Those who are spiritually blind will always believe the Bible was somehow corrupted, because the Mormon church told them so in the beginning (by Joseph Smith Jr himself) and those who simply do not believe in God today. 1 Cor 2:14 “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness until him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
I've never heard of you or heard you speak and just wanted to say that you very clearly explain all of the teaching very well. Not saying this to lift your pride but you are a very good teacher.
@@scottvance74…the majority of Christians already know this. So why are they ok with it? Because the doctrine/teaching is consistent with the rest of what is taught. There’s no change in the principles, values or teachings.
@@scottvance74 1 Cor 2:14 “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness until him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” -- Until you are truly born again, you cannot understand the meaning of Scripture, for it is Spiritually discerned.
@@BGCflyer By this standard (allowing for later texts if they are consistent with the rest of what is taught), mainstream christians should embrace the Book of Mormon. It's largely consistent with Biblical teachings and KJV english. But of course most Christians reject the Book of Mormon. From the outside, this looks very much like a dual standard or special pleading.
@@scottvance74 ...The Book of Mormon is not accepted because there are no manuscripts to show it was authentically written by the people/prophets who claim to be the authors. Show us even a part of a manuscript from Moroni, or Nephi. Then you might get Christians to look at the Book of Mormon as an authentic and historic writing. Just to say, well you have to pray about it, doesn't cut it for authentic and historic writings. The books of the New Testament were not all decided on after the Nicene Council as falsely eluded to in Dan Brown's book the Divinci Code. It was a processed that took several centuries. The objective was to provide true authentic writings of God which show the Messianic fulfillment of the Tanahk (Old Testament). The 66 books in the current Bible today does just that. Any so called books that were even considered later, like the gospel of mary, went through the same test that the other books did. For example, were there manuscripts disseminated to all of the churches? If so, can we actually see these ancient manuscripts and test them to see that they are authentic. Secondly, what is taught in the writing needs to be consistent with the original "gospels" of Matt, Mark, Luke John and the other writings of Peter, John, James and Paul. If the teachings of the writings in questions are even slightly different or there were no other manuscripts or if there are other clues that the acclaimed written wasn't written by the person the book says its' written by, then it is not included in the canon of the Bible. It's a very strict criterion but understandably, it should be as we are talking about the word of God. Wes Huff does a great job at explaining the process of how the Bible was put together and why so many other so called gospels were not included. See www.wesleyhuff.com
There were many competing sects up until about the third century AD that had wildly different ideas about the nature of God and Christ. That "simplicity" you speak of is the result of generations of church fathers establishing an orthodox narrative and then winnowing down the canon of scriptures until they had selected the books that backed their narrative. My point is, Christianity is a very messy religion.
@@shamrockdirtwork7945 You say that but how do you know the nature and character of your god? Through the writings of men. Everything you think you know about God and Jesus has been filtered down to you through men. If you had not been raised in an environment where these doctrines were preached to you BY MEN (and women) then the Judeo-Christian god would simply be another bit of mythology like Zeus or Thor.
@@squeakhawk01 Then you do not know the true history or facts. When you seek the reasoning of man and trust that reasoning over trusting the word of God, you set yourself up for believing in more and more man made (Satan lead) doctrines that "make sense" because Satan is the most cunning, manipulative being ever created. If Satan could use his cunning to convince 1/3rd of the angels in heaven to join him, how hard do you honestly believe it would be for him to convince the masses to believe and follow a false gospel? You can do a UA-cam search for: Vodie Baucham, is the bible corrupt? He goes into some wonderful detail explaining the conspiracy theories needed in order for that to have actually happened.
@shamrockdirtwork7945 - well said. The Bible is like the yellow brick road in the wizard of oz. Is was when they got off the yellow brick road that bad things happened to Dorothy and her friends. If people would just open their Bible and read it as is, they wouldn’t be led astray by all kinds of teachings that sound appealing to itching ears.
Hey, I just wanted to say thank you for how you put this info. Together. I was a convert to LDS church and have been lds for 44 years, I have been inactive for 10 years. Reason being..Is mostly because of all the flip flopping, but now I have been studying the bible..I see a lot of discrepancies. It's been unsettling.
.....and we were always brow beaten into believing in any doctrine the Church leaders spewed out. "Doubting", we were told, is the first step toward apostacy. And of course, there has always been the fearsome consequences if we didn't go along. I look back on my life in the Church and seethe with anger how I was lied to and made to feel guilt and remorse for my feelings at the time, and observe how the Church leaders have now denounced those commands, and so many others. What's next?
I was employed at The Church Offices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from 1975 through 1980. One of my assignments there was to research in The Church Archives, and I had access to "sensitive" files in that official assignment. The result of that experience, I chose to leave The Church Offices, and was employed by Hughes Aircraft in CA. Little did I know that the Stake President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was a friend of my boss. When he sent the local bishop to my home to inquire of me why my wife and I were getting divorced, I replied, "I do not recognize your authority over this family. You can leave my house." So, I chose to leave The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm officially a member of Community of Christ today. This is why I said to be kind to yourselves. We all must forgive them who are leading institutional churches "for they know not what they do". My Personal experience is that only the principles of Love Light and Truth reach into Eternity. So, my advice for LGBT + is to endeavor to attune with the vibrational frequencies of Love Light and Truth ourselves.
@AntonioAFelizJr - When I speak to devote Christians who hate their LGBTQA+ fellow Earthlings, I tell them that it seems to me that God sent people with differences as a test of how they follow his commandments of "Love Thy Neighbor", and how they failed the text, they just stare with open mouths.
@@ironeagle9850 I don't understand that question. To whom did you direct your question? As for myself, I do my best not to hate. I do my best to acknowledge the imperfections in us all. When I disagree with others, I do my best to be respectful because I know that's what evokes their return of respect. If my words didn't do that, please forgive me. Hate is never my intent
5 If any of you is lacking wisdom, ask God, who gives to all generously and ungrudgingly, and it will be given to you. 6 But ask in faith, never doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of a sea, driven and tossed by the wind. James 1:5-6 NRSV
None of these are canonical doctrine of the LDS church. The list for most other churches would be pages long and would require a series to address. Human error and errors of translation are throughout the Bible. OT states several times that God had to repent. Discrepancies with the death of Judas, etc.
I think the biggest problem is the claim to having "modern prophets." If a prophet can authoritatively teach something later rejected as a gross falsehood...how can I have any confidence that the prophet today is correct? What use is a prophet if prophetic teaching is so unreliable?
The church is trying to play it both ways. The Gospel Topics essays clearly describe the seer stone. But, two days ago -- June 1, 2024, I was in an LDS church and that painting from the Ensign, with Joseph's finger on the plates, acting like he's doing a traditional translation, hanging on the wall in the hallway in the church building. They may or may not still teach it, but that painting hanging on the wall speaks louder than the Gospel Topics essay.
Brigham Young taught the Adam God theory but it was never accepted by the Church and was not recorded as scripture. After his death in 1877 the teaching was largely rejected as conjecture and faded away. The Idea that Jesus was married as promulgated as another theory but never accepted as doctrine by the Church and was not recorded in scripture. The Idea that Jesus was married and had children is not a unique view. There are many other people (non-LDS) who believe that to this very day. Blood atonement was also not accepted by the Church as a whole and not recorded as scripture either. Neither was the curse of Cain teaching a teaching that was similarly taught among various mainstream Christian sects as well. It was how the Church interpreted the scriptures especially those found in the Pearl of Great Price. There is no recorded scripture about what was then called "the Negro doctrine." The Book of Mormon Translation and understanding of that translation has evolved with further light and knowledge especially in receiving the massive document trove now found in the Joseph Smith Papers and in other fascinating documents more recently received from the Community of Christ.
Reminder that in the LDS book called Pearl of Great Price, which is considered scripture, we have the Book of Abraham, chapter 1 verse 26. Regarding the lds website claim that they denounce all claims that any race has been cursed, see verse 26. For extra credit maybe start a couple verses before that. There is a bold statement in lds scripture that the Caananites and Egyptians were dark skinned, were among that “race”, and were *cursed. For the LDS church to make the claim that no race has been cursed, they have to refute their own scripture. --- Reminder that the book of Abraham came from Joseph apparently being caught up into a vision after coming in contact with Egyptian relics (so the story goes now since they have disposed of the prior explanation that the book came from translating Egyptian scrolls). Why the Hebrew God of the Old Testament would allow or give any truthful vision to come from being in contact with idolatrous relics… of the same people that enslaved hebrews during the time of Moses… is beyond me.. Our God is a jealous God, and rightfully so. The hebrews dwindled in the desert for 40 years to wring the idolatry out of them. The same hebrews that wanted to go back to Egypt because they didn’t prefer the man’s that came from heaven in comparison to the fish they had in Egypt. Every plague of God thru Moses was a direct attack on the Egyptian Gods and what they claimed to have power over. But Joseph smith touches Egyptian medallions from a traveling salesman in the United States and all of a sudden goes into a vision to write holy scripture? These medallions and papyrus have idolatrous gods all over them, and Joseph states they are actually the Jehovah God of the Hebrews? Hold up… wait a minute… something ain’t right.. 🤔
@@stanleyhall8951No because it's nothing but a false Pagan religion started by a crazy nut who calls himself a prophet ain't never prophesied about nothing biblically
Thank you for standing for the True Biblical Christ! HE is Everything !! 🙏 ✝️🕊️❤️🔥l so appreciate your many excellent videos. I am former Mormon. I have family members think l am crazy apostate black sheep. They are however, very polite about their distancing and shunning.😂 They just keep me far away, and won't listen to anything l have to say. 😂 I pray l may stay soft in my heart. lt is difficult. ✝️🙏❤️🔥 Blessings to you and yours, in Jesus most Holy name.
@ I have found that only through love and example can we bring others to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Thank you for your comment and support.
Well, the fact of the matter is that they were once taught by the church leaders and were wrong and thus your prophets were wrong, yet the church is true?
The top hat and seer stone were not taught for decades in church curriculum. It is only in the last 10 years that the church web site admits that was the prime method for the translation from the plates. I have manuals for different auxiliary groups in the church. I collect one that cover decades. No mention was made of a top hat until recently. There is a new video with the current President where he discusses the top hat and seer stone.
Interestingly, the hat and stone history used to be referred to as anti-Mormon propaganda when I was active LDS in 70s-80s. Now this info is on the official LDS website under the Gospel Topic Essays as official church history. Hmmm....come to think of it, most if not all the topics in this collection of essays were considered anti-Mormon just a few years ago.
@@karenl7791 Many LDS members were excommunicated for exposing a lot of the things which were considered anti-Mormon but are now acknowledged by the LDS church and covered (apologetically) in the Gospel Topics Essays. That said, their are still a lot of Mormons who still think these thins are anti-Mormon propaganda.
@@karenl7791 Yes it was referred to as anti-mormon propaganda. And when those essays were published they were supposed to stop people leaving the church. However it has backfired. There were members who had no idea of some topics for the essays. It was shocking to members. The essays were a response to the Swedish Rescue.
The belief in blood atonement is interesting, as it pairs well with the "blood oath" that was required by new members of the freemasonry movement. So much of Mormonism was derived from pagan masonic practices.
So, if “modern” prophets say that their predecessors were teaching false doctrines and would lose their souls, then why should one believes that Brigham Young was the right prophet to follow after Joseph Smith’s death and not the others? Or better yet, when the “prophet” Nelson says that a prophet would not lead the saints astray, does he mean Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, others about these false doctrines, and also includes Monson and Hinckley for using the term “Mormon”? Then one may ask, how the. We know who is right when a current “prophet” changes the previous prophets teachings? Or are all they just false prophets and do as they want when in power?
The Book of Mormon says that the atonement of Jesus Christ is, "..infinite and eternal..". This, to me at least, should end all the confusion because, if it's not, then why believe in the Resurrected Christ, the infinite and eternal God?
The great thing is that this is taught in the Bible, so you can accept the true teachings of the Bible without having to bind yourself to religious leaders whose false teachings deviate from God’s word. As a Latter-Day Saint, you subject yourself to these false teachers.
@BNichols021 Antonio, here. You're mistaken about my belief. I'm not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, I know that Joseph Smith Junior is/was a true Prophet of God. That fact doesn't take anything away from my belief in the truth of the Bible's texts. I accept the word of God wherever it is written in the ancient texts. The reality of the atonement of Christ Jesus is in its eternal and infinite nature. That's why I commented on the posting. Blessings 🙌
You said in a comment down below "I DO believe," you did not say that you DO know. Are you going to change your statement now to that you know? So, unless you and your interpretations are without flaw and continue your somewhat shallow and semi-informed criticisms, their must be room for a little error in your assessments - if a little, then their could be a lot. You sound a tad like Saul who became Paul. I hope you stop attacking certain followers of Jesus who are led by flawed leaders , just like ALL the other traditional Christians have very flawed leaders also. It all comes down to faith. That includes atheism too. It just means that when you take the leap of faith into the fog, will you step over a small crack in the ground, or plummet off the edge into the abyss. I have found that all directions of faith can be found very wanting - that includes atheism, statism, secular humanism, all forms of Chrisianity, etc. You know that the Catholic church recognizes internally 150 years or so of currupt popes. Many of your Christian sects offten accept Catholic baptisms, but they NEVER accept LDS baptisms. That's OK because they only accept their own also. It's also interesting that the idea of the Trinity was voted on at the councel of Nicaea to unify the factions. How do you kow they were correct. Those who voted against were either killed or exiled. You better be sure you are right before you one day have to do some serious backpedaling. But then there is pride
@@BNichols021 I'm not 100% sure. I'm open to the idea, but I'm careful to fully accept it as we have been warned by modern prophets to avoid the "theory". I'm okay with thinking that Brigham Young was never fully understood, and that we will have to wait for further clarification on it. Maybe that clarification is that we must abandon the idea entirely. It does make sense within Mormon Cosmology, and this was explained in the most detail in Parley P. Pratt's book "The Key to the Science of Theology". I highly recommend reading that if you want to understand why we believe what we believe, and how we understand life and God.
@@Misa_Susakiif a prophet says that he has spoken Scripture to you (as Young himself said), and you must state that you can’t be sure if it’s true, then you are not treating him as a prophet. On the flip side, if Brigham claimed to have spoken Scripture and was blatantly false in His claims, then he has failed the biblical test of a prophet. There’s not really a middle ground here.
@@BNichols021 I acknowledge your opinion, but I don't have to agree to the rules you're laying out there. I can believe whatever I want to, although there is logic and a system to my belief. Thanks!
So how did we get the Book of Mormon? It came from somewhere. If it's all Joseph Smith's words, he must have been a good person, because there are many things in it that are very helpful. Because he was a good person, the writings were by ancient prophets I believe and therefore the word of God. I suspect some things are irrelevant.
i disagree. there has been more information found...such as joseph smith papers that sheds light as to how the translation was done. at first this bothered me because i wasnt aware of this. but it really does not matter how but that it happened. what i imagined was done a different way. we were not ready to hear about exactly how because it would have been misconstrued.
Using a top hat is better than using a chamber pot. You are actually right, it really does not matter how but that it happened. I’ve heared those exact words when others where arguing about the translation.
1) I am a Happy Former Mormon, or FoMo as some call it. I left when I was 19 in the early 1970s in large part because of the "curse of Cain" and the racism (and misogyny) of the church. Women _still_ aren't allowed to hold the priesthood and ascend to the high church administration. (Thank goodness the Prophet got a message from God that it was now okay to allow people of darker skin into the priesthood, just in time for that big push into Brazil! --- I never understood why ANY people of African descent joined the racist church.) 2) It _REALLY_ flattened me when I found out about that teaching in missionary school that it was _perfectly acceptable to "lie for the lord"!!!_ I was completely disillusioned. 3) Another LDSer absolutely _insisted_ to me that she was a direct descendant of Yeshu' himself and that the church's genealogy records proved it! I warned her not to tell the bishop, but she was ecstatic about her discovery. I left before I found out if she had any fallout. 4) Does the church still insist on showing Yeshu' as a blue-eyed, blonde-haired Swedish male model? 5) I was sad to learn that good old Angel Moroni has been booted off the temple spires and the church logo in favor of just another same-old-same-old depiction of Yeshu' The church has dumped one of things that made it a unique stand-out from the crowd. Moroni must feel betrayed!
Oh, yes, regarding caffeine - - - The church changed it's teachings about imbibing caffeine-laden foods because Willard Romney was seen drinking tea? That's like Catholics buying blessings and dispensations from their church. The hypocrisy! I know LDSers who struggled their whole lives with avoiding tea and coffee especially in social situations. I _still_ do not drink coffee even though I left the church decades ago. >_
At 13:07. The response of the church and its historians to artistic depictions of the BM translation process is "we have no control how artists depicted the process in the past". The church did have control. In fact the First Presidency approves content for the Ensign and Liahona. The same for anything on its web site. Ditto for any curriculum manuals past and present.
I could have saved myself 40+ years of my life....50..... if I had known about The Rock in a Hat AND MONEYDIGGING. I would have laughed and been GONE!!
Mormonism is straight up blasphemous. Not just these teachings, but the teachings that the Mormon church currently teach, that we can be "gods" and be like God, which is the very first lie and temptation in the Bible from the devil! Jesus also clearly stated many times that he is God, yet they deny it. It is so sad.
Oh I thought you might be an ex-mormon or something or these people like NEMO on here who look into Church issues. But it looks like you aren't one or not even an ex-one. You have definitely done a lot of work researching for sure. There are more things, but you don't need me telling you.
I remember as a kid doing "baptism for the dead" now I'm 43, and I rejoined the church in 2005 not knowing what I was getting myself into. Every church service was about joseph smith, no talk of Jesus at all, I stayed in America for 15 years and nobody ever approached me with Jesus and i never knew or heard the work he did on the cross for my sins. So hearing ppl talk about lds i had to do my own digging, and in one of the Sunday classes i was asked how many gods were there and i said 1 to my surprise he said i was wrong he said there's 3 Gods and that right there woke me up. I kept going to lds but not as enthusiastic as before. And finally one of my colleagues ask me what's wrong and i told them straight up i don't believe your church is true. So he brings the bishop the following week and we talked and i told him the same thing and they just got up quietly and left. I am so thankful for the Word of God for His Word is the truth. All my family is lds except for my dad he committed suicide when i was really young so i don't know, but I'm ready to share with my immediate family the truth, but the family that adopted us are keeping my 7 sisters away from me which i haven't seen them in 30+ years.
Y'al shuld read yer Bok de Marmon more. Right there in Alma 11:28 & 29. Zeezrom asketh, Is thar more than 1 God? Amulek sayth, hell No. (Read betwixt the woards) Perversere to verse 38 and it sayth Son of God is the very Eternal Farthur. Then verse 44, Christ the Son, God the Father and the Holy Spirt "is one Eternal God". That thar be a better explainin' of thee Trinity than anywhar in the Bible and most Creeds. Whoever composed Alma (lst century BC) believed in the Trinity. No mention of the Trinity in Romon empire Christianity before the 3rd century after Christ. BTW Jesus was Jewish. Born a Jew, lived a Jew, taught Jewishism, died a Jew under a sign that mocked him being King of the Jews. not King of the Christians. All of the writers of the entire New Testament were Jews, exceptin' maybe Luke who was high-flutin' Hellionised Jew doctor. Jews don't believe in the Trinity.
The problem with your video is that you make an assumption on how revelation is given to man. Is anyone alive today that can tell us exactly how the prophets of old received the teachings that eventually made it into the Bible? It is much easier to scrutinize a man whom only lived less than two centuries ago compared to someone who lived more than two millennium ago. I think the biggest test is to look at the work itself or in this case The Book of Mormon rather than looking at the leaders of the religion that followed it.. How it came to be is perhaps not as important as it being present to read and therefore able to test Even if it is a work of fiction it would be remarkable in the details and lengths it goes to make a convincing case that it is inspired. I know of no other book that has the legacy and broad appeal that the Book of Mormon has and yet is labeled pretend scripture. If it is pretend scripture then it is probably one of the best examples of pretend scripture in modern times. Look, I don't care how Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, whether with the help of some kind of seer stone or not. He still wrote and published this book. And for anyone to be able to write this book the way it was written is either a literary genius with an incredible imagination or divinely inspired. As a writer myself and having read the Book of Mormon several times I think I will go with the later of my two assessments.
The video isn’t stating which way it *should* have been, but rather calling out the issue that the LDS Church itself has misrepresented the methodology of the translation until just recently.
@@weldenjon Joe had an incredible imagination. inspired he was not, unless that inspiration came from our adversary, the prince of this earth. That makes more sense since much of his teachings were not only against the Bible, but against what he wrote in his original book that he tried to self-publish as the author.
@@georgebauerschmidt5289 If you have read The Book of Mormon you might notice that it only glorifies God and the Savior. I would not expect something that was inspired by Satan to do that. Satan is not one to praise either Heavenly Father or Jesus Christ. Yes, the BoM does differ doctrinally with the Bible but it also agrees with it on many other things. There are hundreds of different Bible translations today that obviously don't agree with each other. Yet are they all the work of Satan? I think not. I think we all get to interpret scripture in a way that makes the most sense individually to each of us. There will be those that agree and of course those that disagree. Are we prepared to label everyone that disagrees with our religious views as Satanic? I certainly hope not. Joseph Smith no doubt deeply studied the Bible and in the course of that study formed his own opinions. Perhaps he felt he needed to write a book to express them. If there is any fault the fault would be in the story he claimed was their origins. But if that was purely born from his imagination I still have to give him credit for writing such a detailed work on his own personal interpretation of scripture. Who, if any of us could duplicate that if we were to even try? I don''t fault Joseph for this and I certainly don't believe God will either!
The idea that mormons stopped believing that Jesus was married in the 1960s is just false. We talked about it quietly in BYU religion classes in the 1990s. Even the idea that the seer stone in the hat was somehow public knowledge in the 1990s is pretty bogus imho. If you compare the rhetoric on the topic you will note that the real change didn't happen until about 2015, with hints of it coming around 2005. Nelson's quote in 1993 (as well as Maxwell's made at the same time but only published in 1997) was merely a reaction to Quinn who they had just excommunciated for telling the truth about seer stones and post-manifesto polygamy which continued in earnest until about 1905. The scholarly community knew about seer stones since 1834, but there were public denials into the 1980s at a minimum. While it's fine to ask Mormons to do some self introspection based on false teachings or prophecits, you may want to consider doing a little yourself given the various false prophecies in the new testiment of an imminent 2nd coming.
Thanks for noting that - super interesting to me! When I've asked about Jesus being married to street-level Latter-day Saints I interact with, they've either responded with "no, we've never believed that" or "I'm not sure." But in response to this video, several people have told me that they were taught that Jesus was married. And in terms of the seer stone - yeah. Agreed. In terms of "false prophecies" in the New Testament - are you referencing Matthew 24? Or something else?
@@GLM Note that when you quote nelson in 1993 regarding the seer stone in the hat, you really should be showing the article as origionally printed (available online). In the article, it has a picture of the translation with Joseph looking at gold plates to translate while on the opposite of a curtain from Oliver Cowdery. So even though he is partially acknowledging the translation process, the picture is literally showing something else. Most readers at the time (myself included) would entirely miss the fact that the stone in the hat method was the actual method. These incorrect artistic depictions continued to be published until Jan 2021 (Liahona). So while the church "came clean" on translation in 2015, they continued to send conflicting (and incorrect) messages regarding translation until at least 6 years later. I have not seen any incorrect artwork more recent than that. If you study the artwork and messaging you will see that in general it went from a "joseph looking at plates on the opposite side of a blanket from oliver" translation in the 1980s to a "Joseph directly looking at the plates opposite oliver at a table" in the 1990s depiction. There is some overlap however. If you study this topic in more depth, you will note that there was a period between 1905 and 1935 when the church was fairly open about the seer stone in translation and even taught it in sunday school. However, they generally did not mention the hat with one execption (New Wittness for Christ, BH Roberts, Vol 2, 1909). Not here to argue false prophecies. You can do a google search or read entries in wikipedia if you are interested.
Though I can't prove that Jesus was married, that if a man is to be a Rabbi, that man has to be married according to Jewish law. Either way, it doesn't bother me. I did research it years and years ago.
The brown seer stone in a hat is all hearsay upon hearsay. The church's official statement is it is sketchy and Joseph Fielding Smith said it was not true. Do some real research instead of believing mere hearsay gossip.
@@kenmccain9743 The contention that one has to be married and therefor Jesus was married is addressed by Dan McClellan (faithful member) in one of his videos. This tradition started 2-3 centuries after Jesus as I recal, so would not have applied to Jesus. He may have been married, or perhaps not, but there is no compelling evidence imho that he was polygamous. That strikes me as a 19th century invention meant to help to justify polygamy by those practicing it.
@@GLM You said "I DO believe," you did not say that you DO know. Are you going to change your statement now to that you know? So, unless you and your interpretations are without flaw and continue your somewhat shallow and semi-informed criticisms, their must be room for a little error in your assessments - if a little, then their could be a lot. You sound a tad like Saul who became Paul. I hope you stop attacking certain followers of Jesus who are led by flawed leaders , just like ALL the other traditional Christians have very flawed leaders also. It all comes down to faith. That includes atheism too. It just means that when you take the leap of faith into the fog, will you step over a small crack in the ground, or plummet off the edge into the abyss. I have found that all directions of faith can be found very wanting - that includes atheism, statism, secular humanism, all forms of Chrisianity, etc. You know that the Catholic church recognizes internally 150 years or so of currupt popes. Many of your Christian sects offten accept Catholic baptisms, but they NEVER accept LDS baptisms. That's OK because they only accept their own also. It's also interesting that the idea of the Trinity was voted on at the councel of Nicaea to unify the factions. How do you kow they were correct. Those who voted against were either killed or exiled. You better be sure you are right before you one day have to do some serious backpedaling. But then there is pride.
I grew up in the church. I’m 27 and just recently left. Recently endowed too and they definitely show Archangel Michael/Adam as one being and he assisted in the creation of the world with Jesus under Elohim’s direction. I remember learning about the stone in the hat, and my dad taught me that black people are black because Cane was cursed with black skin after killing Able. So…
i am personally a believer in mormon fundamentalism & i truly appreciate that you provide each source of your claims/quotes from previous prophets instead of being disingenuous like others.
I grew up Mormon. Went to four years of seminary before High School each morning. Received a Duty to God Award. In my early 20s, I walked away from the church when they threatened to excommunicate me for being gay. Lots happened, but in my mid-60s I had to go back simply cause I needed financial help. Either God is fickle and changes his mind or religion is a bunch of man-made BS. No such thing as A true church. I have shaken hands with angels, Been to heaven briefly, and Seen more than my share of miracles. I can safely say that God is Pure Love and he loves diversity. All good people go back to heaven which is our home. We come to earth to learn and grow. God loves watching his kids grow and learn. You asked God for a certain type of life; he may or may not have recommended changes, and you are free to make those changes or not. Why did the Mormons allow blacks? The church wanted to expand and build temples in places like Brazil but under the old rules, they could not have any blacks holding the priesthood because people did not know what race the great-grandparents were so they had to change the rules. In the short version, it was about expansion and money. Joesph Smith has already reincarnated into a new body and can be seen on Sister Wives seems his soul loves having multiple wives
actually, he started a business "finding lost treasures" and used the stones/hat method to find stuff for others, collecting a fee for his services. When that business fell apart as you would expect any 'magic' act that makes false claims, he moved on to religion.
5:50 *Was taught to (Counsel of 50) Kirtland, (Counsel of 700) Salt Lake, individuals receiving 2nd Anointing. The Endowment Ceremony isn't in the scriptures either.*
If they would have taught me this decades ago as a convert i would have ran away so fast. I was a 5 time Young Woman President and when I discovered that my leadership had knowingly lied to me about their history and the rock and hat I was completely devastated 💔
We must always use proper discernment. To ask of God James 1:5. To not be content with things which require assumptions. To seek what the reasoning behind it was, etc. Without thinking in the Spirit, we are not very pleasing to God.
Now do a video explaining the complexity of the Book of Mormon. Was Joseph a prophet or was he a literary savant? There is no in between. Which one is it?
I actually *should* do a few more videos on the BoM, we really don't have many on our channel yet. My thoughts - even if Joseph really did have supernatural experiences that brought forth the Book of Mormon, that doesn't automatically make Joseph a prophet or the BoM true. 1 John 4 warns us about false spirits-one can have a real supernatural encounter...but that encounter doesn't immediately make something true. We must test the spirits, and test supposed prophets by evaluating their actions and their teachings.
@@GLM read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover and then explain the complexity. People have tried and tried to explain how it came to be. At first the excuse was Joseph was too dumb to produce such a work, then it morphed into the idea that Joseph was a genius with literary abilities surpassing even Shakespeare. I’m interested how you would explain away the intricacies and complexity that is scripture or the Book of Mormon. It has yet to be explained by anti Mormons like yourself.
@@j.d.westphal6949plagiarism and made up lies, because I can take down Russell Nelson less than 5 minutes from the Bible or any of those other false prophets that the Mormon Church calls Prophets an apostles they all false
President Brigham Young expressed concern that the Latter-day Saints would “have so much confidence in their leaders” that they would “settle down in a state of blind self-security,” abandoning the responsibility to obtain their own revelation: “Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not” (Journal of Discourses, 9:150).
15:55 this is assuming you believe that the bible, most of which was written after the deaths of not only the 12 apostles, but also the 70 disciples. also its assuming you believe the currently-accepted versions of the gospels and epistles and acts (even the acts had some variance, and the only "proof" we really have the epistles were written by paul during his life ARE the acts, and theres quite a bit of proof the gospels were altered to fit the supposedly-earlier-written epistles), and it assumes you dont believe the dozens of other gospels that didnt make the cut in the 4th century for the compiled bible. most importantly, it assumes you trust this helter skelter of books and letters are in anyway trustworthy - i mean, the most quoted part of the bible is the "he who is without sin may cast the first stone" parable, in which the apostles brought a woman who was guilty and they had all the evidence to punish her, and Jesus was so annoyed that they obviously hadnt been paying any attention, he ignored them before finally uttering those eternal words - i mean, he didnt even trust them, with witnesses and proof, to carry judgement (which is something all Christians should take note of - if he didnt trust them, his apostles who experienced his ministry firsthand, to judge people, then who the fucc are you?). so he doesnt trust there judgement, and yet people trust the bible, which is almost entirely of dubious authorship, to be his word? also the stone parable is funny cus ITS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY FROM JOHN . its from another entire gospel that was allegedly "lost" - (meaning purged when the pope sent epiphanius around to slander any Christian communities that refused to pay taxes to the Pope, literally claiming there was somehow dozens of groups of hundreds of people kidnapping and killing babies to use their blood as the eucharist, yet apparently no one in the "victim" communities cared, cus theres no record of this happening, and the Pope used this as an excuse to delete whole gospels from history, at least one of which (the one which the stone parabel comes from) seems to have been all about Jesus being completely against His word being used to police or judge ANYBODY but YOURSELF)
Such a well produced video! So much gaslighting in the Mormon church. I'm glad I'm out. I'm not Christian, but I have found myself and believe in a higher power more now than ever before.
This was an interesting video, well sourced, and can assumed to be historically accurate. Your opinion at the end, is the only piece I would push back on. God respects human agency and gave each of us unique attributes that we carry with us. Joseph Smith was a man. Kim Jung was a man. David Whitmer was a man. Joseph Fi Smith was a man. Each LDS prophet has had human weaknesses and frailties, some like to admit them more than others. Your video is merely a testament that God can take a fallible sinful man, and use that man to bring the past marvelous works. It’s comforting to know that even a simple and fallible man such as myself can be used by God to create good works. I pray that we as the LDS church can continue changing, continue receiving revelation, and continue doing a great good on the earth.
Christ already called us weak fallible men to take up our cross and follow him. I do not understand why you would permit yourself to be involved in an institution that has radically changed with such volatility over its short lifespan. Compare that to the 2000 year teachings of Christ which are already revealed. It is beyond frustrating watching well intentioned good people twist themselves into knots to justify their affiliation with a group on such shifting foundation
I have read the Bible, but I'd argue that there aren't teachings that have changed. We have ONE single major transition-from Old Covenant to New Covenant (which was foretold and prophesied). Other than that, I'd argue that no commands or teachings have passed away. What did you have in mind specifically?
I'm guessing 100% that you, gray man, have never once read the Bible to make-up such an outlandish concept without even once providing any evidence of your fictional story. If you want to invent stuff to write, remember Joe already tried that.
@@GLM all it takes is one to prove my point. deuteronomy 21:18-21 "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not heed them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, to the gate of his city. And they shall say to the elders of his city, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones; so you shall put away the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear." Matthew 18:21-35 Then Peter came to Him and asked, “Lord, how many times will my brother sin against me and I forgive him and let it go? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered him, “I say to you, not up to seven times, but seventy times seven. that is a 100% change. which prove my point 100% period.
@@clydeLedford nothing "funny" about it. jesus completely changed the law of moses. here's the big problem for you, and all so-called christian churches, that you refuse to acknowledge ... jesus founded his church on prophets and apostles. the scriptures clearly tell us that, many times. and there is only one church today that has prophets and apostles. the restored church of jesus christ. "the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints" because ... the church of god in the time of the prophets, was built on the foundation of the prophets, i. e. upon those doctrines and doctrinal truths delivered by them. the church of god under the new testament, is built not only on the foundation of the prophets, but of the apostles, Rev. 21:14. this is precisely what paul affirms in ephesians 2:20 where he says that the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, christ jesus himself being the cornerstone” (cf. rev. 21:14; also 1cor. 3:10-11 in context). the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints is the ONLY church today built on a foundation of apostles and prophets. anti-mormons are teaching a false gospel (just like all protestants).
2:58 so if Young taught false doctrine then doesn't that many he was a false prophet and that the current SLC Mormons do not have to fullest of the gospel. They cannot discredit President Young without discrediting their own religion
One of the Doctrines not brought up by Brigham Young was that for something to be put down as true it must be unanimously accepted by the First Presidency and 12 Apostles. The Adam God concept was opposed by Apostle Orson Pratt as was the restiction on blacks to the priesthood. Did you know what other "doctrine" was not officially accepted by the First Presidency and 12 apostles? Salvation by grace qlone without works, Paul was totally on his own on that. The official position of the church was that Jewish members would keep the customs but Gentiles were only to avoid certain things.
The LDS Churches greatest problem is it hedged all its bets on the notions of old would never be challenged because of the lack of fact checking ability of the times. Fast forward to 2024, items such as the gospel topic essays combined with the internet, has exposed all this nonsense. Too bad the prophets (profits) couldn’t see that coming.
The sign of a false prophet was not to test their teachings. It was “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” Matt. 7:16 Now, you may argue that “fruits” refers to “teachings,” but I think it has more to do with how they lived their lives, what they did with their lives, or what impact on society that their teachings produced. In my mind, that is the test. No one man pronounces the doctrine of the Church. In today’s Church, doctrine only comes with the unanimous consent, or pronouncement, of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. No doubt, this is the policy now because of the mistakes of the past. What Brigham Young said may have been disagreed with at the time by others with sincere beliefs. They were men. As men they were subject to mistakes, and to misspeak. We have never had the doctrine that the prophets (even Joseph Smith) and apostles were other than fallible men. Let’s begin with the fact that many truths were restored through the prophet, Joseph Smith. But not all truth was restored. There were many things alluded to for which there was no definitive answer. I’m sure that Brigham Young and Orson Pratt thought they had figured things out sometimes. They were wrong. They may have spoken of their own speculation as if it were scripture. That doesn’t make it right. Doing so was one of the many mistakes that they made. Jesus being married is pure speculation. Of course, God could reveal the answer to an individual, but evidently he hasn’t thought it necessary to reveal it as doctrine to the Church. To me, it makes sense, but knowing whether that is true or not is my own speculation, and totally unnecessary to my salvation. I am a committed member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The “fruits” of the teachings of the Church have been wonderful for me and my family. I get great satisfaction from the emphasis on family, on living a moral life, and on helping my fellow man. The speculations of past leaders are inconsequential as far as my happiness goes, and as far as my salvation. I have seen this church change so many people’s lives for the better. That is the “fruit.”
The way to tell whether a person is a true prophet or not is the same way that one would test that Jesus is Lord. 1 Corinthians 12:3. Stop bashing others and seek for the Spirit of truth. It will change you for the better and open your eyes to the deeper truths about God, mankind and this world.
We're given a number of tests for prophets in the Bible, and while I agree that one can't deny that Jesus is Lord and be a prophet - that's not the entirety of the test for a genuine prophet. Out of curiosity - what do you think that Paul meant by saying "Jesus is Lord" there?
@@GLM 1 Corinthians 12:3 shows us the ultimate way of knowing the truth about anything i.e. by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:19-21, Matthew 16:16-18 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. All the miracles and teachings that Peter had seen and heard were more powerfully added to by the witness of the Holy Ghost given him from the Father. Jesus is Lord means that Jesus is the Saviour and Redeemer of this world, the Only Begotten Son of God the Father and subject to no one but the Father.
you wrote: _"stop bashing others"_ but if you look at quotes from your past 'leadership' you'll see negative comments towards Catholics, methodist, evangelical, and others. It seems to be very hypocritical especially when I see current members refer to non-members as 'so-called Christians". It seems you don't have the 'spirit of truth' yourself but then expect it from others. That's hypocrisy.
God Loves Mormons has not made a passing comment about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints but is dedicated to putting down the Church and actively and continuously exercises a campaign against it. True Christian’s (which GLM claims to be) don’t do this. Romans 14:1-3. GLM does remind me of a scripture though. Revelation 12:10.
@@AdamEyers True Christians do this against falsehoods and false doctrines. Romans 14 is talking about "opinions" - not issues of doctrine. > "And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 2:24-25). > Speaking about elders - "He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it." (Titus 1:9) > "I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 3). Even Jesus would go to the temple and speak, correct, and rebuke religious leaders. While it is TRUE that we shouldn't quarrel over these "opinions" - we should take care to contend for the faith.
The curse of Cain doctrine did not originate with the latter Day saints. In fact Joseph Smith disagreed with such ideas. Curse of King doctrine came from the Protestants. Latter-Day saints missionaries brought it with them from the deep south. And because Latter-Day saints believe in the Bible, some of them believed this kind of interpretation what the southern baptist had concerning the black people by reading the Bible. There has always been dissension in this View about the priesthood and the blacks in the church. On Joseph Smith himself even said apart black priests in the church in the early years of the church. This was a similar contention that what Peter and Paul had concerning the non-jewish members of the early Christian Church as well. Unfortunately this contention lasted much longer than it should have. But thank God it was settled once and for all.
The difference here is that Southern Baptists and other Protestants can point to their own Scriptures and say, “Ah, this teaching is not aligned with the Bible. I am not bound by those who say otherwise and must reject these false teachings.” Whereas in the LDS church you have the black skin rhetoric used in LDS scriptures and prophets/apostles who are affirming the teaching. Brigham even said he never preached a sermon that couldn’t be considered Scripture. The problem here is that you have bound yourselves to prophets who fail the test of New Testament leadership. As for your comparison to Peter… Peter distanced himself from the Gentiles “because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.” While this is clearly sinful, it isn’t in the same category as blatantly authoritatively teaching that one race can’t inherit salvation, something which flies in the face of what the Scripture clearly teaches. Those leaders who taught this must be rejected entirely as legitimate prophets and apostles.
@@BNichols021in the Bible the first high priest really was Moses in Moses was black all the 12 tribes of Israel are black people, Adam the first man was black he was made in the image of God Jesus tells you he was black when John saw God in Revelation chapter 1 verses 14 and 15 he was black so how is Cain going to be cursed with dark skin when his mom and dad was already black all the priests in the Bible were black men every last one of them God's Church true church was a nation of black people that's Bible 101
Joseph Smith played both sides of the issue. Your funny speculations about Southerners is so wrong. B. Young was a hi up Freemason, and Freemasonry bylaws stated in the Freemasons Indiana Monitor, States that Blacks cannot be a Freemason. The British Monarch gave some Black lodge charters to use Blacks in their Communist & NWO schemes. :.
Um... it is in The Book of Mormon.. missionaries didn't write that. YES.. It was protestant doctrine which is another proof The Book of Mormon is FALSE. It is nothing but a fictional book presented as fact to support 19th century protestant teaching..
@@jameswines6589😂😂😂 You are very mistaken. Moses and Aaron were brothers and it specifically states Aaron was married to a black woman. What would be the reason to point that out if Moses was black. The hair is like that of wool is referring to the color white not the texture.
AND THEN shall they know their Redeemer, who is JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God; AND THEN shall they be gathered in from the four quarters of the earth unto their own lands, from whence they have been dispersed; yea, as the Lord liveth so shall it be. Amen.
We never taught the Adam God theory. The Adam God theory is the fundamentalist interpretation of Brigham Young's teachings regarding the matter. Brigham Young did teach that Adam was our God under the context that he is an always was subordinate to God the Father and Jesus Christ. Moses was also a God to Pharoah according to God in Exodus 7:1 Your conclusions that you listed are not the ones I came to. For example, Brigham Young taught Adam came in a Celestial body, our spirits are Celestial bodies but you implied automatically that Adam had a resurrected body.
I don't think Brigham Young in this sermon was talking about Elohim. He taught that there were many gods just like Joseph did. Adam is a god now and he is our direct ancestor. He is the one that is first in line in authority is what Brigham Young is saying.
@@Elizabeth-rk3do its reassuring the tree was put in front of their noses, wonders why satan actually got into the garden of eden, to tempt Eve, wondered if they Adam an Eve had a belly Button each, all these questions, but in the end Elizabeth Adam knew Eve they raised Cain an Abel,. Grateful that we may all know good an evil, an raise our own families, .We all hope our death too is a temporal one an not one of the spirit.
"We were promised prophets and apostles, not speculators and fringe philosophers."
- Aaron Shafovaloff
Most prophets have been fringe philosophers at some point. In fact, Jesus and Budda started out on the fringes of society before going mainstream.
💯
Not false prophets and a different gospel. Zion Missouri never happened; Deut. 18:20-22
Who are the prophets and apostles that you say we are promised?
@@AdamEyers They are in the true restored church of Jesus Christ, and if you are looking somewhere else for them, or still looking for Elijah's return, you are looking in the wrong place!!!
Questions that come to mind while watching this video:
1. If things that were clearly taught by the prophet at General Conference cannot be considered authoritative and binding, then how can we trust anything said by today’s LDS prophets and apostles?
2. Though many will claim that these teachings were never “official” doctrine, it’s hard to imagine that anyone who loves the Lord could teach such wild speculations in any sort of official capacity.
3. If Latter-Day Saints are selective about which teachings they believe from their own prophets, then how can they expect others to take their prophets seriously?
4. If present-day prophets overrule past prophets, then how does the Latter-Day Saint know that today’s “truths” won’t be overruled by tomorrow’s prophet?
DAMN!! YOU ARE GOOD!! Just exactly what I was about to express. BRAVO !!!! KUDOS TO YOU !!!
Just as a past prophet in the Bible is overuled by the next current prophet in the Bible e.g Adam is overrule by Abraham and then Abraham is overuled by Moses etc.
I wouldn't say that any prophet has "overruled" a prior one.
@@GLM So the law of Moses is not done away with after Jesus Christ's Atonement and Resurrection? Or do we all need get in line to board the ark because the prophet Noah is alive and expecting a flood? Or was God wrong when he told Abraham he would be a father of many nations? Or do we all need to be obedient so the Laihona will point in the right direction? Or do we all need to go on mass to gather to Utah? Or do we all need to still be reading the Bible in Latin? Or was Martin Luther The German Lawyer Monk wrong when he nailed his 95-Point Theses to the church doors in Wittenberg; if so we all should still be Roman Catholic? Or was Henry VIII wrong to break with the Roman Catholic church? Or was God wrong when he kicked out Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden?
@@GLMI’m referring to the common LDS response that modern prophets trump prior prophets
I was taught all this back when I was growing-up in the Mormon church- 1950- 1969. I left in 2001. If I bring any of it up now I am labeled an anti-Mormon hater. Mormonism is a mess -- a mass of confusion. "God is not the author of confusion."
actually, all teachings of god change through time as humanity is capable of fulfilling those commands.
have you not read the bible ?
I was in the LDS faith from early 1980's ~ 2000's, and was taught all the same things. However in my time the violent gestures were removed in the endowment ceremony, and other changes were made. I honestly wish I had heard about the Tanners sooner, but never found any real information to learn about the Mormon history until much later after 2010.
@@grayman7208 No, God's word does not "change" but the minds of men create changes they want in order to conform to an ever changing world view. I should ask you if you have ever read the Bible, if so, then you would know that Jesus came into the world to show up that we could not keep the moral law that was given in the time of Moses, but Jesus who lived a perfect and sinless life, fulfilled the law, and brought us a new and everlasting covenant as was for shadowed by the prophets in the Old Testament.
The Lord adds line upon line and precepts upon precept, here a little and there a little. The whole history of Christianity is also a history of such development. Because Protestant churches are so fragmented and have huge confusion amongst one another, they don't really have any meaning for history or record-keeping. Hence it is almost impossible to go to the local Baptist Church and find records about what they may have talked about 200 or 300 years ago. So it is very easy to assume in a small church somewhere in the Midwest, that we have no confusion and we have never had any controversies. Because there are no people interested in trying to dig up anything about some local church of 150 people. And because most Protestant churches are fragmented into small units like these, no one has any incentive to really investigate their past teachings and their past actions and so on. Large organizations on the other hand are much easier to keep track of and look into their past. And when you have a huge historical record library, it is easy to be like the tanners and pervert whatever is being said in those records to serve your purpose. I one time did take these Tanner's claims of whatever the historical record says. Took the books and followed the sources, I noticed very quickly how bad the distortion was. They took passages from two different books and added them together to make it seem like they're talking about the same topic, and thus as if that was somehow an explanation of their own twisted interpretation. What's the difference of course with me, is that I am a student of History. I understand how history is made and how it can be interpreted and how it is used throughout different cultures. And with this I can see that Tanners would never be considered reliable historians if they wrote about any other topic except Mormonism. If their method of using the sources would be applied to the founding fathers or the history of the United States, today would be laughed and ridiculed publicly just like Fawn Brody was ridiculed and savaged by the historians of her time, when she tried to venture into the field of American history and tried to write a biography of Thomas Jefferson. But when she writes about Joseph Smith nobody seems to mind, yet her method With Smith was exactly the same as with Jefferson.
@@brotherinchrist72
"God's word does not "change"
nonsense.
reading the bible proves that.
god's word changes throughout history as humans learned to follow his words.
your example of christ fulfilling the law proves that.
the sermon on the mount proves that.
christ's commands to his followers proves that.
Growing up in the church, I learned about the Urim and Thummim. Young mormons today have never heard those words. So many things have changed and they will claim "that was never taught." It's infuriating!
LOL!!! Riiiggghhttt. We have heard of it and we know about it from various scripture study classes.
Uh, no. NO. The church has never once claimed that any teaching about the Urim and Thummim never occurred. It is STILL doctrinally sound. Do you know why? Because it's the TRUTH! Take a church history class at a church owned university. You might find a few nuggets there which are official, but which you still nevertheless choose to DENY. It works in a similar fashion in a court of law. This is how guilty people often go free, and how innocent people like Trump get convicted. It's how THE WORLD operates - not how God operates.
You can blame the leaders of the church for misleading members. When I grew up in the 90s I totally believed in plates on the table and joseph smith running his fingers across them. Total lies.
i was taught about the ur and thummim in sunday school in the early 2010s, but my teacher said they were a pair of stones that were like glasses, never explained how they were used in the translation or anything, i was still under the impression it was a “normal” translation process until my shelf broke in 2020
Seer stones. Every heard of those ... ? That's what the Urimm and Thummim are. Tools of trade of prophets, seers, and revelators, as directed by God himself - the Alpha & Omega, the Great I AM -
All the current shit you hear about the church is the SAME OLD SHIT as aways since decades past, but magnified by a factor of 10 +
Trust me - this is surely NOTHING new. We're heard it all a jillion times.
I was born and raised LDS, but left last year after a couple of years deconstructing Mormonism. At the same time, Jesus led me to a wonderful Bible believing church where I have accepted Jesus! I have appreciated your videos along my journey. You are spot on about all of these former LDS teachings. Another doctrine that is changing is who in the godhead is worshiped. I was taught in Institute in the late 1990's that because LDS considered itself monotheistic only Heavenly Father was worshiped, but love and adoration were given to Jesus (Bruce R. McConkie taught this), but now there are statements from the church leaders (Elder Cook) and on the LDS website that Jesus is worshiped. Since Heavenly Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are three individual people in Mormon theology worshiping more than one person in the Godhead is problematic because it is polytheism.
Wow - Praise God! Very encouraging.
Yeah, we originally were going to do "10 things the LDS Church No Longer Teaches" - but it got too long ha. I'll probably do a "5 more things the LDS Church No Longer Teaches" eventually, and cover some of the things I cut.
Praise God that he lead you into all truths! Thank you for sharing your experience. I was involved in Mormonism from the early 1980's ~ 2000's and then fell away for a long time, but eventually opened the Bible and then was lead to a wonderful Christian church that teaches / preaches from the Bible alone, and found the true Jesus, and was saved.
I just pray that more will have their eyes opened before it is too late.
Praise God for you.
I have a similar story. I was raised and at times throughout my life I was very devout in my faith as a LDS member and priesthood holder, but it all starting crumbling after a new missionary showed me the king follett discourse, I struggled with this for a couple of years and ultimately accepted it and explained it away and all was good but then I dug even deeper into the doctrine of the church became more active in church and responsibility around the ward until one day I had the idea of “the second anointing “ brought to my attention by a fellow member. This was yet another doctrine that I had to unpack and explain away to myself. Then I found the doctrine of blood atonement, and Jesus being a polygamist and I finally decided I needed to re read the Bible for myself but not through the eyes or influence of the church. I bought a new Bible off the internet and read the entire New Testament in two weeks and Jesus revealed himself to me, and allowed the scales to fall off my eyes and see the Lds church for what it was and now I have been baptized and joined a Bible believing Jesus preaching church where I serve in the worship team and have had a true born again experience, and met the true Jesus the savior of our world and the one true God, who came to this world completely God and completely man and died for our sins, so that we can have eternal life to glorify and worship him. And it is my personal call to spread this message to the world and help to get my family and anyone else I can away from this and other false religions who pervert the gospel and pose as ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing trying to lead souls to hell.
Anyone on the fence about the lds church or the jehova witness church or the Roman Catholic Church, or anyone who doubts there is a God and wants to talk about who Jesus is, and how he will come to where you are and meet you, message me. I promise the gospel and good news that Jesus himself commissioned us to spread in the New Testament is real, and his grace is free to all, not by anything you can do, or because of anything you have done to earn or deserve it, but free to any who seeks to have a relationship with him and call and believe upon his name. The grace of Jesus Christ our lord is enough to save you. I am happy to converse with anyone who wants to know more about how.
@@jssparkman04 Thank you for such a powerful testimony! I can identify with many things you said and praise God every time someone has their eyes opened and they find the real Jesus Christ of the Bible.
For a belief system only 200 years old or so, the LDS doctrine certainly has changed often.
I would bet money that any early Christian, Jew or Muslim, if transported to the modern day.. would not recognize their own religion. Changing is about the only thing every religion has in common
@@Austdenorthodox hasn't...
So has Christianity. It went from Priests must be celibate to ministers could be married. If you're not baptized before you die you'll be damned. To baptism is a work and works aren't needed. From homosexuality is among the worst of sins to now in some congregations having homosexuality clergy and so on.
No not really, some adjustments but not changes to the doctrine on a frequent basis.
@@Dandeeman26 tell me you don't know what catholicism teaches
This is a great video to pair with the last one! If the early teachings were taught by prophets but modern LDS people call it false doctrine then we can see that modern LDS people don’t see the earlier prophets aren’t really prophets.
The apologetic is that the living prophet has priority over past prophets. Also, they will say that sometimes the prophet speaks as a man and not as a prophet. This was actually taught by Joseph Smith, Jr. Unfortunately, you can never really know when he speaks as a man vs. as a prophet, and when he dies, his teachings become fair game to be completely disavowed.
Yes it seems like trouble.
No, what we see is the vast majority of Mormons do not care about what the past prophets "may" or may not have taught, and believe every cunning word play that the LDS church has learned to master craft and speak. They call past doctrines "theories" and they are at a point to where it no longer matters to them what past prophets may have taught, because they sugar coat with cunning words and explanation in their gospel topics they hand out. It's nothing more than corporate PR damage control.
@@honder1866 Oddly enough, president Nelson recently said that a prophets words are true and shouldn't be questioned. Weird, huh?
If you have a testimony why question or doubt the Prophet? Or any teaching at all?
I was born a raised in a fundamentalist Mormon group where these things are still taught. I can say that you represented these teachings very accurately and did so in a way that didn’t blow these things out of proportion. Being a fundamentalist group, they claim that the early prophets are correct and the new ones that reject those teaching are the false prophets. This video was well prepared and delivered.
Are you still part of this fundamentalist Mormon group? If so, does your group still hold to the doctrines that Brigham Young and other taught?
@@brotherinchrist72 it's difficult to say. I no longer promote the beliefs. I have chosen to surrender these beliefs and have asked Jesus to fill the cup I once tried to fill on my own. I was raised in polygamy and have married two wives myself before God gave me an experience that radically changed me. Culturally, I am still a member, but I do not participate in the religious practices. This group still upholds all these beliefs that Brigham Young and others taught. The journals of discourses are treated like Scripture in many ways.
@@glennallred5510 I will continue to pray for you then, that the Lord will help guide you into all truths. I can't imagine what many of those experiences must have been like.
Do you view the Bible as the word of God or is that still considered to have been corrupted and precious truths lost?
I ask because that seems to be one of the bigger issues that many are vexed with when asked if they believe God can lie or fail, in which we know he cannot, and if God cannot lie or fail, then how can the Bible have ever been corrupted when God promised us his word would never fade away, and his Church would never fail.
@@brotherinchrist72 I appreciate the prayers. I need guidance. Yes, I Believe the Bible to be the word of God and 100% trust worthy.
At this point I feel that God has told me to stay put, for reasons I'm not sure, but I hope it is to bring others to Christ.
If I may ask, how do you know you're not under another man made belief or whether it comes from God this time? meaning, what difference is there in the channels & source of doctrine from what you trusted then vs. now?
ANYTHING that ANYONE stops teaching, is revealing that they NEVER RECEIVED it from GOD in the FIRST PLACE !!
Another major teaching that was changed is who are the descendants of the Lamanites. Older editions of the Book of Mormon have in the introductory matter the statement that the Lamanites are the principle ancestors of the Native Americans. The current edition states the Lamanites are among the ancestors of the Native Americans.
Yes. And the BoM states that the Americas was hidden from the world to protect the Americas from being overrun from the coming BoM Israelites.
The problem with this video is that all of the five points are not doctrines that were taught by the church. Adam-god theory it's called a theory because it was Brigham Young's own ideas that he brought up a few times. But which were contested by the other apostles and also the membership by large. Some of these beliefs may have been taught by individuals in various different circumstances and settings, but they were never doctrines taught by the whole church, nor have they been doctrines.
It does not follow from the quotation you gave that Adam impregnated Mary. Since Brigham Young has very specifically made this point in other talks that Mary was a virgin. You are now making your own assumptions and forcing them into Brigham Young's ideas. But this does not change the fact that the church leadership contested this from the beginning, and this has never been taught as a doctrine apart from these few talks Young gave.
When it comes to the marriage of Jesus, these are again opinions of some leaders of the church but this has never been taught as a doctrine in the church. How many church members even today believe that Jesus was married as did some of the early Christians also believe the same thing as we know from the Gospel of Philip for example. But one thing that all of those Mormons who do believe in this marriage, don't necessarily agree with, is that he was a polygamist. In fact most that I have discussed with those who believe that Jesus was married, do not believe that he was polygamist. And all accept that this is not a doctrine of the church.
When it comes to interpreting the past in Mormonism, Protestants have a huge problem with their assumptions of Sola scriptura. They assume that whenever Mormon apostle says something that it is a scripture in Mormonism. But there is a very clear path that has to be taken before anything can become scripture. The 12 apostles have to agree unanimously on whatever is proposed as doctrine or scripture. This has never been done on any of these five points in this video. Several early Latter-Day saints leaders had unique perspectives on many things, it does not make those things doctrines. Those are things that people might have discussed and speculated about, but that is all it is. I have had views concerning Divinity and salvation, and those views have evolved and changed. What are the views I had 20 years ago, now I disagree with them. But there's one thing that has not changed, and that is the testimony about Jesus Christ that he is the only name under heaven by which man can be saved. About the necessity of the authority from God to build up his kingdom. The reality of the Book of Mormon. The power of prayer and personal revelation. These are the things that don't change in the church even if the application of policy can vary from time to time. Interpretations and speculations also have their own cultural and historical phenomenons. But that is exactly why there is a church in place, to keep these phenomena from taking over the church itself.
So you are saying that the curse of Cain was not taught as doctrine? If it wasn't doctrine, why was it necessary for a revelation from God to SWK (see declaration #2) to allow all worthy members the opportunities to obtain saving ordinances in the temple. This "doctrine" continued over 120 years. To call it a random opinion from a few leaders of the church is embarrassing.
@jaredite when you say, “they didn’t teach it as doctrine, they were only saying their opinions”, this mode of thinking creates several problems:
1. It fails to honor the test of a prophet as outlined in the Bible. The Bible doesn’t say, “If the prophet issues a teaching but it isn’t approved by his peers, then feel free to disregard.” Rather, it says, “But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak… that same prophet shall die.”
2. It gives the prophet a license to teach absolutely anything without repercussion. What if today’s prophet were to say that Jesus never had a resurrection? That would be heresy. But by your logic, he would merely be asserting his opinion. Someone can’t just come up with some wild idea about God with serious ramifications and start teaching it with reckless abandon, let alone a prophet who should fear the Lord above all else!
3. When a prophet speaks his opinion in an authoritative setting, he should qualify it as such. In these examples, we have the exact opposite situation given that Brigham said all of his sermons could be considered Scripture.
A prophet who recklessly teaches his own wild opinions without qualifying them (especially when they are in direct opposition to Scripture) is a massive red flag when employing the fruit inspection test that Jesus talks about, and it certainly fails to meet the New Testament standard for church leaders as outline in Timothy, Titus, and Peter.
Well said.
As a member of the LDS Church we were taught that everything that comes out of the mouth of the prophet is scripture. It is inspired of God. If that is true, then it must be treated as doctrine because the originator is God himself. That is what a prophet does, conveys the truth of God to us. Maybe it is not officially church doctrine, but it still has to be obeyed. Disobeying God's word brings consequences. But stating that something is not really LDS doctrine is a way for church leaders to explain away something that might be controversial or uncomfortable to deal with, or is later found to be false, or that they simply don't wish to confront it. in the end they don't want to know that their leaders are wrong because that would make their church wrong. As an aside, I never believed in the curse of Cain doctrine, although some who were biased against black people fully accepted it.
As a former member of the LDS Church, I've heard the idea that Jesus was married openly talked about from the point I joined in 1979 and up until I left in 2016. I heard it was a sin to marry outside of your race through the early 80s. As a Mormon, I was told the translation method of Joseph's Book of Mormon is that he used the plates and Urim and Thummim in all cases through the early 80s. Joseph's own seer stone in a hat idea came creeping in slowly until it evolved into the narrative that he didn't need the plates to translate the Book of Mormon at all.
The seer stone wasn’t an idea that came creeping in. That was a historical fact that the church was actively hiding until they realized they could no longer suppress that information.
Joseph Fielding Smith said the brown seer stone in a hat story is false , the official Church History Institute manual says it is sketchy. You left the church over hearsay and false rumors. You should have done your own research instead of believing written gossip.
JOSEPH ' S BOOK OF MORMON IS SATANIC, DECEIVING, FULL OF LIES, ETC. . SHAME ON HIM, JOSEPH?!? WHERE IS HE RIGHT NOW ? MORMONS , PLEASE CULTIVATE YOURSELVES . START READING " HOLY BIBLE "❤
The Book of Mormon is not historically accurate the Prophets are wolfs in sheep’s clothing with predatory practices people should not be adding in their baptism that they have to believe in Joseph smith being a prophet why is that a requirement for being baptized and why would they hold a member accountable if they realize is false and leaving the church once they decide is false baptism is for everyone again why punish one of your members that bring someone to be baptized and decides to change to a different church that is just despicable Russell Nelson has been caught telling lies often enough Mormon in Hebrew means more good no book in the Bible describes it’s self better than the other the Book of Mormon projects red flags even on its own Cover
Tithing is a scam God does not want money he wants you to know him how me he loves you and wants your love remember what Jesus said about taxes Mormons are poor children being deceived sorry but wow broh you see a church that tells you to Tithe just run from it
what plates? The Ten commandments were heard then seen by the entire congregation, not just a handful of men in on the scheme.
Christianity's prophets have a 100% success rate.
How do you know??? It was thousands of years ago
@jasonvesmam7044 God has confirmed it in his word, which he has perfectly preserved.
@@AustinD1646 the Bible is alot of bs as well. Backdated profecies and stuff
Success at what? Go read some dissenting opinions and scholarship Austin.
@@AustinD1646this is a ridiculous point. Even the apostles of Christ disagreed and had contentions with one another.
The “OFICIAL DOCTRINE” is that there is NO OFFICIAL DOCTRINE!!!
Scripture is official doctrine! Read Moses 7:8, Moses 7:22, and the first chapter of Abraham!
@@GeorgeDemetzscripture frequently contradicts itself though
@@YogiTheBearMan Not if it is understood correctly, barring errors of translation, etc.
@GeorgeDemetz who understands it correctly so we may understand it correctly ??
@@bigtobacco1098 I do! I have studied it for more than 60 years!
Doesn't it bother them at all that they have NO source material? No actual Book of Mormon, and NO copies? There is NO source document of the witnesses. The godly thing to conclude is that they are not of God.
You can say the same thing about the gospels in the Bible. There are no original manuscripts for those. And all evidence points to the fact that they were all written, at a minimum, decades after the fact. There are a ton of other issues with the Gospels that bring their authenticity into question but you can easily look those up elsewhere.
My point is, you are correct, the Mormon canon of scriptures are very hard to take seriously because of lack of primary sources. The same goes for the Bible.
@@squeakhawk01 That's not exactly true. At some point there was a source, which was copied over and over again with great care. In many instances, the people could contest the facts with actual witnesses.
While it is true that we may no longer have or know the sources, most of the time they did.
For instance, Noah was still alive when Abraham was born. And Noah knew many people who knew Adam. The time span between Joseph (son of Israel) and Miriam (Moses' sister) was less than a lifetime.
Moses got God's "stamp of approval" and everyone could witness this.
With Joseph Smith, we don't have anything like this at all. In fact, we have evidence of his shenanigans and his rejection of Christianity and their God.
@@ts-900 Sure. But those original documents were likely constructed from oral traditions. We are talking at least 2 to 3 generations of oral traditions before they were written down (not to mention that Matthew and Luke copy huge chunks of Mark).
And since we are talking about Mormonism, consider all of the "miraculous" stories and legends that became established in the Mormon faith within the first and second generations of the LDS church. And that is WITH journals and contemporary documentation.
In fact, the history of Mormonism is itself a giant case study on how the mythology and legends of the early Christian church could have developed, all without actual supernatural events.
@@squeakhawk01 That's not exactly true, either. We have words and phrases in those books which push back the time that they were written.
First-hand witnesses would have been alive and there would have been evidences of the stories.
First instance, some of the saints who rose again, or their relatives, could attest to being made alive in Christ.
I cannot consider the "miraculous" stories and legends (of Mormonism) because I don't think I've heard of very many, if any.
I have noticed that all such stories are devoid of Christ, or faith in God. So are they miraculous? I would say not.
As far as I can tell, Mormonism is independent of Christianity and sees Christianity as corrupt. And yet it claims Christianity as its foundation.
@@squeakhawk01 Those who are spiritually blind will always believe the Bible was somehow corrupted, because the Mormon church told them so in the beginning (by Joseph Smith Jr himself) and those who simply do not believe in God today.
1 Cor 2:14 “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness until him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
I've never heard of you or heard you speak and just wanted to say that you very clearly explain all of the teaching very well. Not saying this to lift your pride but you are a very good teacher.
Thank you for your courage dear brother. I appreciate you! We must defend the word of God which NEVER changes.
Which of course is why the ending of Mark was added later.. Please pick up any scholarly text on the bible and do a little reading.
@@scottvance74…the majority of Christians already know this. So why are they ok with it? Because the doctrine/teaching is consistent with the rest of what is taught. There’s no change in the principles, values or teachings.
@@scottvance74 1 Cor 2:14 “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness until him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” -- Until you are truly born again, you cannot understand the meaning of Scripture, for it is Spiritually discerned.
@@BGCflyer By this standard (allowing for later texts if they are consistent with the rest of what is taught), mainstream christians should embrace the Book of Mormon. It's largely consistent with Biblical teachings and KJV english. But of course most Christians reject the Book of Mormon. From the outside, this looks very much like a dual standard or special pleading.
@@scottvance74 ...The Book of Mormon is not accepted because there are no manuscripts to show it was authentically written by the people/prophets who claim to be the authors. Show us even a part of a manuscript from Moroni, or Nephi. Then you might get Christians to look at the Book of Mormon as an authentic and historic writing.
Just to say, well you have to pray about it, doesn't cut it for authentic and historic writings.
The books of the New Testament were not all decided on after the Nicene Council as falsely eluded to in Dan Brown's book the Divinci Code.
It was a processed that took several centuries. The objective was to provide true authentic writings of God which show the Messianic fulfillment of the Tanahk (Old Testament). The 66 books in the current Bible today does just that.
Any so called books that were even considered later, like the gospel of mary, went through the same test that the other books did.
For example, were there manuscripts disseminated to all of the churches? If so, can we actually see these ancient manuscripts and test them to see that they are authentic. Secondly, what is taught in the writing needs to be consistent with the original "gospels" of Matt, Mark, Luke John and the other writings of Peter, John, James and Paul. If the teachings of the writings in questions are even slightly different or there were no other manuscripts or if there are other clues that the acclaimed written wasn't written by the person the book says its' written by, then it is not included in the canon of the Bible. It's a very strict criterion but understandably, it should be as we are talking about the word of God. Wes Huff does a great job at explaining the process of how the Bible was put together and why so many other so called gospels were not included. See www.wesleyhuff.com
Only man can take the simplicity in Christ and create a confusing, convoluted religion. Read your Bible. It is all you need.
There were many competing sects up until about the third century AD that had wildly different ideas about the nature of God and Christ.
That "simplicity" you speak of is the result of generations of church fathers establishing an orthodox narrative and then winnowing down the canon of scriptures until they had selected the books that backed their narrative.
My point is, Christianity is a very messy religion.
@@squeakhawk01 It only gets messy when man gets between God and the believer.
@@shamrockdirtwork7945 You say that but how do you know the nature and character of your god? Through the writings of men. Everything you think you know about God and Jesus has been filtered down to you through men. If you had not been raised in an environment where these doctrines were preached to you BY MEN (and women) then the Judeo-Christian god would simply be another bit of mythology like Zeus or Thor.
@@squeakhawk01 Then you do not know the true history or facts. When you seek the reasoning of man and trust that reasoning over trusting the word of God, you set yourself up for believing in more and more man made (Satan lead) doctrines that "make sense" because Satan is the most cunning, manipulative being ever created.
If Satan could use his cunning to convince 1/3rd of the angels in heaven to join him, how hard do you honestly believe it would be for him to convince the masses to believe and follow a false gospel?
You can do a UA-cam search for: Vodie Baucham, is the bible corrupt?
He goes into some wonderful detail explaining the conspiracy theories needed in order for that to have actually happened.
@shamrockdirtwork7945 - well said. The Bible is like the yellow brick road in the wizard of oz. Is was when they got off the yellow brick road that bad things happened to Dorothy and her friends. If people would just open their Bible and read it as is, they wouldn’t be led astray by all kinds of teachings that sound appealing to itching ears.
Hey, I just wanted to say thank you for how you put this info. Together. I was a convert to LDS church and have been lds for 44 years, I have been inactive for 10 years. Reason being..Is mostly because of all the flip flopping, but now I have been studying the bible..I see a lot of discrepancies. It's been unsettling.
.....and we were always brow beaten into believing in any doctrine the Church leaders spewed out. "Doubting", we were told, is the first step toward apostacy. And of course, there has always been the fearsome consequences if we didn't go along. I look back on my life in the Church and seethe with anger how I was lied to and made to feel guilt and remorse for my feelings at the time, and observe how the Church leaders have now denounced those commands, and so many others. What's next?
I was employed at The Church Offices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from 1975 through 1980. One of my assignments there was to research in The Church Archives, and I had access to "sensitive" files in that official assignment. The result of that experience, I chose to leave The Church Offices, and was employed by Hughes Aircraft in CA. Little did I know that the Stake President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was a friend of my boss. When he sent the local bishop to my home to inquire of me why my wife and I were getting divorced, I replied, "I do not recognize your authority over this family. You can leave my house." So, I chose to leave The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm officially a member of Community of Christ today. This is why I said to be kind to yourselves. We all must forgive them who are leading institutional churches "for they know not what they do". My Personal experience is that only the principles of Love Light and Truth reach into Eternity. So, my advice for LGBT + is to endeavor to attune with the vibrational frequencies of Love Light and Truth ourselves.
Thank you. I needed this. They know not what they do. I go by love God love yourself love one another. Again thanks.❤🎉🎉🎉
@AntonioAFelizJr - When I speak to devote Christians who hate their LGBTQA+ fellow Earthlings, I tell them that it seems to me that God sent people with differences as a test of how they follow his commandments of "Love Thy Neighbor", and how they failed the text, they just stare with open mouths.
Tell me, do you hate the people you disagree with?
@@ironeagle9850 I don't understand that question. To whom did you direct your question?
As for myself, I do my best not to hate. I do my best to acknowledge the imperfections in us all. When I disagree with others, I do my best to be respectful because I know that's what evokes their return of respect. If my words didn't do that, please forgive me. Hate is never my intent
@@MossyMozart MossyMozart, This is Antonio replying to you. I am an openly queer man since I came out to myself in 1980. Happy Pride!
5 If any of you is lacking wisdom, ask God, who gives to all generously and ungrudgingly, and it will be given to you.
6 But ask in faith, never doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of a sea, driven and tossed by the wind.
James 1:5-6 NRSV
None of these are canonical doctrine of the LDS church. The list for most other churches would be pages long and would require a series to address. Human error and errors of translation are throughout the Bible. OT states several times that God had to repent. Discrepancies with the death of Judas, etc.
I think the biggest problem is the claim to having "modern prophets." If a prophet can authoritatively teach something later rejected as a gross falsehood...how can I have any confidence that the prophet today is correct? What use is a prophet if prophetic teaching is so unreliable?
I am grateful for witnessing the TRUTH. THANK YOU!!
I am an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and none of this bothers me or shakes my testimony.
Facts and evidence that have already disproved your Cult probably mean nothing to you too. How convenient.
Lake of fire is where your headed. 🙏
@@Tiberius- I don’t think so. I have a personal relationship with my Savior Jesus Christ and He will save me. You should be careful though…
@returnedfrompanama
Different Jesus, different Gospel, Different Spirit.
@@Tiberius- I worship the True and Living Jesus. How about you??
The church is trying to play it both ways. The Gospel Topics essays clearly describe the seer stone. But, two days ago -- June 1, 2024, I was in an LDS church and that painting from the Ensign, with Joseph's finger on the plates, acting like he's doing a traditional translation, hanging on the wall in the hallway in the church building. They may or may not still teach it, but that painting hanging on the wall speaks louder than the Gospel Topics essay.
Brigham Young taught the Adam God theory but it was never accepted by the Church and was not recorded as scripture. After his death in 1877 the teaching was largely rejected as conjecture and faded away. The Idea that Jesus was married as promulgated as another theory but never accepted as doctrine by the Church and was not recorded in scripture. The Idea that Jesus was married and had children is not a unique view. There are many other people (non-LDS) who believe that to this very day. Blood atonement was also not accepted by the Church as a whole and not recorded as scripture either. Neither was the curse of Cain teaching a teaching that was similarly taught among various mainstream Christian sects as well. It was how the Church interpreted the scriptures especially those found in the Pearl of Great Price. There is no recorded scripture about what was then called "the Negro doctrine." The Book of Mormon Translation and understanding of that translation has evolved with further light and knowledge especially in receiving the massive document trove now found in the Joseph Smith Papers and in other fascinating documents more recently received from the Community of Christ.
Reminder that in the LDS book called Pearl of Great Price, which is considered scripture, we have the Book of Abraham, chapter 1 verse 26.
Regarding the lds website claim that they denounce all claims that any race has been cursed, see verse 26. For extra credit maybe start a couple verses before that.
There is a bold statement in lds scripture that the Caananites and Egyptians were dark skinned, were among that “race”, and were *cursed.
For the LDS church to make the claim that no race has been cursed, they have to refute their own scripture.
---
Reminder that the book of Abraham came from Joseph apparently being caught up into a vision after coming in contact with Egyptian relics (so the story goes now since they have disposed of the prior explanation that the book came from translating Egyptian scrolls).
Why the Hebrew God of the Old Testament would allow or give any truthful vision to come from being in contact with idolatrous relics… of the same people that enslaved hebrews during the time of Moses… is beyond me..
Our God is a jealous God, and rightfully so. The hebrews dwindled in the desert for 40 years to wring the idolatry out of them. The same hebrews that wanted to go back to Egypt because they didn’t prefer the man’s that came from heaven in comparison to the fish they had in Egypt.
Every plague of God thru Moses was a direct attack on the Egyptian Gods and what they claimed to have power over.
But Joseph smith touches Egyptian medallions from a traveling salesman in the United States and all of a sudden goes into a vision to write holy scripture?
These medallions and papyrus have idolatrous gods all over them, and Joseph states they are actually the Jehovah God of the Hebrews?
Hold up… wait a minute… something ain’t right.. 🤔
Perhaps the LDS Church is just another church to believe in. Can't anyone get it right?
@@stanleyhall8951No because it's nothing but a false Pagan religion started by a crazy nut who calls himself a prophet ain't never prophesied about nothing biblically
Is there going to be a part two?? 👀👀👀
Thank you for standing for the True Biblical Christ!
HE is Everything !! 🙏 ✝️🕊️❤️🔥l so appreciate your many excellent videos.
I am former Mormon. I have family members think l am crazy apostate black sheep. They are however, very polite about their distancing and shunning.😂 They just keep me far away, and won't listen to anything l have to say. 😂 I pray l may stay soft in my heart. lt is difficult. ✝️🙏❤️🔥
Blessings to you and yours, in Jesus most Holy name.
" there's a white sheep in every family"...
@jaredharris1940 ❤️
May God bless you as your story is similar to mine. ☦️❤️🔥⛪️
@@thomasreams87 ❤️🩹🙏✝️ Blessings to you Thomas, in Jesus Holy name
@ I have found that only through love and example can we bring others to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Thank you for your comment and support.
Well, the fact of the matter is that they were once taught by the church leaders and were wrong and thus your prophets were wrong, yet the church is true?
The top hat and seer stone were not taught for decades in church curriculum. It is only in the last 10 years that the church web site admits that was the prime method for the translation from the plates. I have manuals for different auxiliary groups in the church. I collect one that cover decades. No mention was made of a top hat until recently. There is a new video with the current President where he discusses the top hat and seer stone.
Interestingly, the hat and stone history used to be referred to as anti-Mormon propaganda when I was active LDS in 70s-80s. Now this info is on the official LDS website under the Gospel Topic Essays as official church history. Hmmm....come to think of it, most if not all the topics in this collection of essays were considered anti-Mormon just a few years ago.
@@karenl7791 Many LDS members were excommunicated for exposing a lot of the things which were considered anti-Mormon but are now acknowledged by the LDS church and covered (apologetically) in the Gospel Topics Essays. That said, their are still a lot of Mormons who still think these thins are anti-Mormon propaganda.
@@karenl7791 Yes it was referred to as anti-mormon propaganda. And when those essays were published they were supposed to stop people leaving the church. However it has backfired. There were members who had no idea of some topics for the essays. It was shocking to members. The essays were a response to the Swedish Rescue.
A top hat sounds better than a chamber pot. 🤡
@@smileysun9212 Or a salamander.
6:50 “beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ”… what Bible were they reading because it’s nothing like mine.
The belief in blood atonement is interesting, as it pairs well with the "blood oath" that was required by new members of the freemasonry movement. So much of Mormonism was derived from pagan masonic practices.
That's what got me Masonic temple ordinance
So, if “modern” prophets say that their predecessors were teaching false doctrines and would lose their souls, then why should one believes that Brigham Young was the right prophet to follow after Joseph Smith’s death and not the others? Or better yet, when the “prophet” Nelson says that a prophet would not lead the saints astray, does he mean Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, others about these false doctrines, and also includes Monson and Hinckley for using the term “Mormon”? Then one may ask, how the. We know who is right when a current “prophet” changes the previous prophets teachings? Or are all they just false prophets and do as they want when in power?
The Book of Mormon says that the atonement of Jesus Christ is, "..infinite and eternal..". This, to me at least, should end all the confusion because, if it's not, then why believe in the Resurrected Christ, the infinite and eternal God?
The great thing is that this is taught in the Bible, so you can accept the true teachings of the Bible without having to bind yourself to religious leaders whose false teachings deviate from God’s word. As a Latter-Day Saint, you subject yourself to these false teachers.
@BNichols021 Antonio, here. You're mistaken about my belief. I'm not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, I know that Joseph Smith Junior is/was a true Prophet of God. That fact doesn't take anything away from my belief in the truth of the Bible's texts. I accept the word of God wherever it is written in the ancient texts. The reality of the atonement of Christ Jesus is in its eternal and infinite nature. That's why I commented on the posting. Blessings 🙌
You said in a comment down below "I DO believe," you did not say that you DO know. Are you going to change your statement now to that you know? So, unless you and your interpretations are without flaw and continue your somewhat shallow and semi-informed criticisms, their must be room for a little error in your assessments - if a little, then their could be a lot. You sound a tad like Saul who became Paul. I hope you stop attacking certain followers of Jesus who are led by flawed leaders , just like ALL the other traditional Christians have very flawed leaders also. It all comes down to faith. That includes atheism too. It just means that when you take the leap of faith into the fog, will you step over a small crack in the ground, or plummet off the edge into the abyss. I have found that all directions of faith can be found very wanting - that includes atheism, statism, secular humanism, all forms of Chrisianity, etc. You know that the Catholic church recognizes internally 150 years or so of currupt popes. Many of your Christian sects offten accept Catholic baptisms, but they NEVER accept LDS baptisms. That's OK because they only accept their own also. It's also interesting that the idea of the Trinity was voted on at the councel of Nicaea to unify the factions. How do you kow they were correct. Those who voted against were either killed or exiled. You better be sure you are right before you one day have to do some serious backpedaling. But then there is pride
I love the Book of Mormon!
Do you think Adam was God?
@@BNichols021
I'm not 100% sure. I'm open to the idea, but I'm careful to fully accept it as we have been warned by modern prophets to avoid the "theory".
I'm okay with thinking that Brigham Young was never fully understood, and that we will have to wait for further clarification on it. Maybe that clarification is that we must abandon the idea entirely.
It does make sense within Mormon Cosmology, and this was explained in the most detail in Parley P. Pratt's book "The Key to the Science of Theology". I highly recommend reading that if you want to understand why we believe what we believe, and how we understand life and God.
@@Misa_Susakiif a prophet says that he has spoken Scripture to you (as Young himself said), and you must state that you can’t be sure if it’s true, then you are not treating him as a prophet. On the flip side, if Brigham claimed to have spoken Scripture and was blatantly false in His claims, then he has failed the biblical test of a prophet. There’s not really a middle ground here.
@@BNichols021
I acknowledge your opinion, but I don't have to agree to the rules you're laying out there.
I can believe whatever I want to, although there is logic and a system to my belief.
Thanks!
So how did we get the Book of Mormon? It came from somewhere. If it's all Joseph Smith's words, he
must have been a good person, because there are many things in it that are very helpful. Because he
was a good person, the writings were by ancient prophets I believe and therefore the word of God. I suspect some things are
irrelevant.
AMEN BROTHER! Thank You for the BIBLICAL TRUTH.
Even better still: if you hold to any of these now defunct teachings, you are subject to potential church discipline, including excommunication.
Excellent! Do more investigating and discernment! Very good!
i disagree. there has been more information found...such as joseph smith papers that sheds light as to how the translation was done. at first this bothered me because i wasnt aware of this. but it really does not matter how but that it happened. what i imagined was done a different way. we were not ready to hear about exactly how because it would have been misconstrued.
Using a top hat is better than using a chamber pot.
You are actually right, it really does not matter how but that it happened.
I’ve heared those exact words when others where arguing about the translation.
1) I am a Happy Former Mormon, or FoMo as some call it. I left when I was 19 in the early 1970s in large part because of the "curse of Cain" and the racism (and misogyny) of the church. Women _still_ aren't allowed to hold the priesthood and ascend to the high church administration. (Thank goodness the Prophet got a message from God that it was now okay to allow people of darker skin into the priesthood, just in time for that big push into Brazil! --- I never understood why ANY people of African descent joined the racist church.)
2) It _REALLY_ flattened me when I found out about that teaching in missionary school that it was _perfectly acceptable to "lie for the lord"!!!_ I was completely disillusioned.
3) Another LDSer absolutely _insisted_ to me that she was a direct descendant of Yeshu' himself and that the church's genealogy records proved it! I warned her not to tell the bishop, but she was ecstatic about her discovery. I left before I found out if she had any fallout.
4) Does the church still insist on showing Yeshu' as a blue-eyed, blonde-haired Swedish male model?
5) I was sad to learn that good old Angel Moroni has been booted off the temple spires and the church logo in favor of just another same-old-same-old depiction of Yeshu' The church has dumped one of things that made it a unique stand-out from the crowd. Moroni must feel betrayed!
Oh, yes, regarding caffeine - - - The church changed it's teachings about imbibing caffeine-laden foods because Willard Romney was seen drinking tea? That's like Catholics buying blessings and dispensations from their church. The hypocrisy! I know LDSers who struggled their whole lives with avoiding tea and coffee especially in social situations. I _still_ do not drink coffee even though I left the church decades ago. >_
Wonder if we delved into Christianity in general, what teachings are different now then in previous. Oh, wait. That would be a lot.
Unless you’re talking about Orthodox Christians that is.
At 13:07. The response of the church and its historians to artistic depictions of the BM translation process is "we have no control how artists depicted the process in the past". The church did have control. In fact the First Presidency approves content for the Ensign and Liahona. The same for anything on its web site. Ditto for any curriculum manuals past and present.
I could have saved myself 40+ years of my life....50..... if I had known about The Rock in a Hat AND MONEYDIGGING. I would have laughed and been GONE!!
So true!
Excellent and informative presentation
This channel is excellent.
lets pray for them that they come to the truth.
Mormonism is straight up blasphemous. Not just these teachings, but the teachings that the Mormon church currently teach, that we can be "gods" and be like God, which is the very first lie and temptation in the Bible from the devil! Jesus also clearly stated many times that he is God, yet they deny it. It is so sad.
Oh I thought you might be an ex-mormon or something or these people like NEMO on here who look into Church issues. But it looks like you aren't one or not even an ex-one. You have definitely done a lot of work researching for sure. There are more things, but you don't need me telling you.
I remember as a kid doing "baptism for the dead" now I'm 43, and I rejoined the church in 2005 not knowing what I was getting myself into. Every church service was about joseph smith, no talk of Jesus at all, I stayed in America for 15 years and nobody ever approached me with Jesus and i never knew or heard the work he did on the cross for my sins. So hearing ppl talk about lds i had to do my own digging, and in one of the Sunday classes i was asked how many gods were there and i said 1 to my surprise he said i was wrong he said there's 3 Gods and that right there woke me up. I kept going to lds but not as enthusiastic as before. And finally one of my colleagues ask me what's wrong and i told them straight up i don't believe your church is true. So he brings the bishop the following week and we talked and i told him the same thing and they just got up quietly and left. I am so thankful for the Word of God for His Word is the truth. All my family is lds except for my dad he committed suicide when i was really young so i don't know, but I'm ready to share with my immediate family the truth, but the family that adopted us are keeping my 7 sisters away from me which i haven't seen them in 30+ years.
I’m so sorry. That is truly heartbreaking 💔
Y'al shuld read yer Bok de Marmon more. Right there in Alma 11:28 & 29. Zeezrom asketh, Is thar more than 1 God? Amulek sayth, hell No. (Read betwixt the woards)
Perversere to verse 38 and it sayth Son of God is the very Eternal Farthur. Then verse 44, Christ the Son, God the Father and the Holy Spirt "is one Eternal God".
That thar be a better explainin' of thee Trinity than anywhar in the Bible and most Creeds.
Whoever composed Alma (lst century BC) believed in the Trinity. No mention of the Trinity in Romon empire Christianity before the 3rd century after Christ.
BTW Jesus was Jewish. Born a Jew, lived a Jew, taught Jewishism, died a Jew under a sign that mocked him being King of the Jews. not King of the Christians.
All of the writers of the entire New Testament were Jews, exceptin' maybe Luke who was high-flutin' Hellionised Jew doctor.
Jews don't believe in the Trinity.
The problem with your video is that you make an assumption on how revelation is given to man. Is anyone alive today that can tell us exactly how the prophets of old received the teachings that eventually made it into the Bible?
It is much easier to scrutinize a man whom only lived less than two centuries ago compared to someone who lived more than two millennium ago.
I think the biggest test is to look at the work itself or in this case The Book of Mormon rather than looking at the leaders of the religion that followed it.. How it came to be is perhaps not as important as it being present to read and therefore able to test
Even if it is a work of fiction it would be remarkable in the details and lengths it goes to make a convincing case that it is inspired. I know of no other book that has the legacy and broad appeal that the Book of Mormon has and yet is labeled pretend scripture.
If it is pretend scripture then it is probably one of the best examples of pretend scripture in modern times.
Look, I don't care how Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, whether with the help of some kind of seer stone or not. He still wrote and published this book. And for anyone to be able to write this book the way it was written is either a literary genius with an incredible imagination or divinely inspired.
As a writer myself and having read the Book of Mormon several times I think I will go with the later of my two assessments.
Actually, I will add that Joseph Smith must have been both, a divinely inspired man with an incredible imagination!
The video isn’t stating which way it *should* have been, but rather calling out the issue that the LDS Church itself has misrepresented the methodology of the translation until just recently.
@@weldenjon Joe had an incredible imagination. inspired he was not, unless that inspiration came from our adversary, the prince of this earth. That makes more sense since much of his teachings were not only against the Bible, but against what he wrote in his original book that he tried to self-publish as the author.
@@georgebauerschmidt5289 If you have read The Book of Mormon you might notice that it only glorifies God and the Savior. I would not expect something that was inspired by Satan to do that. Satan is not one to praise either Heavenly Father or Jesus Christ.
Yes, the BoM does differ doctrinally with the Bible but it also agrees with it on many other things. There are hundreds of different Bible translations today that obviously don't agree with each other. Yet are they all the work of Satan?
I think not. I think we all get to interpret scripture in a way that makes the most sense individually to each of us. There will be those that agree and of course those that disagree. Are we prepared to label everyone that disagrees with our religious views as Satanic?
I certainly hope not. Joseph Smith no doubt deeply studied the Bible and in the course of that study formed his own opinions. Perhaps he felt he needed to write a book to express them.
If there is any fault the fault would be in the story he claimed was their origins. But if that was purely born from his imagination I still have to give him credit for writing such a detailed work on his own personal interpretation of scripture.
Who, if any of us could duplicate that if we were to even try? I don''t fault Joseph for this and I certainly don't believe God will either!
@weldenjon a man inspired by demons sure
The idea that mormons stopped believing that Jesus was married in the 1960s is just false. We talked about it quietly in BYU religion classes in the 1990s. Even the idea that the seer stone in the hat was somehow public knowledge in the 1990s is pretty bogus imho. If you compare the rhetoric on the topic you will note that the real change didn't happen until about 2015, with hints of it coming around 2005. Nelson's quote in 1993 (as well as Maxwell's made at the same time but only published in 1997) was merely a reaction to Quinn who they had just excommunciated for telling the truth about seer stones and post-manifesto polygamy which continued in earnest until about 1905. The scholarly community knew about seer stones since 1834, but there were public denials into the 1980s at a minimum.
While it's fine to ask Mormons to do some self introspection based on false teachings or prophecits, you may want to consider doing a little yourself given the various false prophecies in the new testiment of an imminent 2nd coming.
Thanks for noting that - super interesting to me! When I've asked about Jesus being married to street-level Latter-day Saints I interact with, they've either responded with "no, we've never believed that" or "I'm not sure." But in response to this video, several people have told me that they were taught that Jesus was married.
And in terms of the seer stone - yeah. Agreed.
In terms of "false prophecies" in the New Testament - are you referencing Matthew 24? Or something else?
@@GLM Note that when you quote nelson in 1993 regarding the seer stone in the hat, you really should be showing the article as origionally printed (available online). In the article, it has a picture of the translation with Joseph looking at gold plates to translate while on the opposite of a curtain from Oliver Cowdery. So even though he is partially acknowledging the translation process, the picture is literally showing something else. Most readers at the time (myself included) would entirely miss the fact that the stone in the hat method was the actual method. These incorrect artistic depictions continued to be published until Jan 2021 (Liahona). So while the church "came clean" on translation in 2015, they continued to send conflicting (and incorrect) messages regarding translation until at least 6 years later. I have not seen any incorrect artwork more recent than that.
If you study the artwork and messaging you will see that in general it went from a "joseph looking at plates on the opposite side of a blanket from oliver" translation in the 1980s to a "Joseph directly looking at the plates opposite oliver at a table" in the 1990s depiction. There is some overlap however. If you study this topic in more depth, you will note that there was a period between 1905 and 1935 when the church was fairly open about the seer stone in translation and even taught it in sunday school. However, they generally did not mention the hat with one execption (New Wittness for Christ, BH Roberts, Vol 2, 1909).
Not here to argue false prophecies. You can do a google search or read entries in wikipedia if you are interested.
Though I can't prove that Jesus was married, that if a man is to be a Rabbi, that man has to be married according to Jewish law. Either way, it doesn't bother me. I did research it years and years ago.
The brown seer stone in a hat is all hearsay upon hearsay. The church's official statement is it is sketchy and Joseph Fielding Smith said it was not true. Do some real research instead of believing mere hearsay gossip.
@@kenmccain9743 The contention that one has to be married and therefor Jesus was married is addressed by Dan McClellan (faithful member) in one of his videos. This tradition started 2-3 centuries after Jesus as I recal, so would not have applied to Jesus. He may have been married, or perhaps not, but there is no compelling evidence imho that he was polygamous. That strikes me as a 19th century invention meant to help to justify polygamy by those practicing it.
The four gospels would not stand your test for truth either, yet I still know they are true.
On the contrary - I DO believe they stand up to scrutiny.
@@GLM You said "I DO believe," you did not say that you DO know. Are you going to change your statement now to that you know? So, unless you and your interpretations are without flaw and continue your somewhat shallow and semi-informed criticisms, their must be room for a little error in your assessments - if a little, then their could be a lot. You sound a tad like Saul who became Paul. I hope you stop attacking certain followers of Jesus who are led by flawed leaders , just like ALL the other traditional Christians have very flawed leaders also. It all comes down to faith. That includes atheism too. It just means that when you take the leap of faith into the fog, will you step over a small crack in the ground, or plummet off the edge into the abyss. I have found that all directions of faith can be found very wanting - that includes atheism, statism, secular humanism, all forms of Chrisianity, etc. You know that the Catholic church recognizes internally 150 years or so of currupt popes. Many of your Christian sects offten accept Catholic baptisms, but they NEVER accept LDS baptisms. That's OK because they only accept their own also. It's also interesting that the idea of the Trinity was voted on at the councel of Nicaea to unify the factions. How do you kow they were correct. Those who voted against were either killed or exiled. You better be sure you are right before you one day have to do some serious backpedaling. But then there is pride.
Hum, is the logical deduction that the church still holds it as doctrine, yet the congregation has become swine, unworthy of knowing?
The more confused chickens are the easier they can be caught..
I grew up in the church. I’m 27 and just recently left. Recently endowed too and they definitely show Archangel Michael/Adam as one being and he assisted in the creation of the world with Jesus under Elohim’s direction. I remember learning about the stone in the hat, and my dad taught me that black people are black because Cane was cursed with black skin after killing Able. So…
i am personally a believer in mormon fundamentalism & i truly appreciate that you provide each source of your claims/quotes from previous prophets instead of being disingenuous like others.
Micah Wilder has a beautiful testimony
Sounds like Judas saved himself according to blood atonement
So now the translation wan’t of the golden plates but a mystical apparition inside his hat. The inconsistencies are astounding.
"PAY LAY ALE"
Whatever happened to "ask of God?"
They should teach this over all things. For it teaches us to cling to the source of all truth.
Very well done ! 👍I suscribe 😊
I grew up Mormon. Went to four years of seminary before High School each morning. Received a Duty to God Award. In my early 20s, I walked away from the church when they threatened to excommunicate me for being gay. Lots happened, but in my mid-60s I had to go back simply cause I needed financial help. Either God is fickle and changes his mind or religion is a bunch of man-made BS. No such thing as A true church. I have shaken hands with angels, Been to heaven briefly, and Seen more than my share of miracles. I can safely say that God is Pure Love and he loves diversity. All good people go back to heaven which is our home. We come to earth to learn and grow.
God loves watching his kids grow and learn. You asked God for a certain type of life; he may or may not have recommended changes, and you are free to make those changes or not.
Why did the Mormons allow blacks?
The church wanted to expand and build temples in places like Brazil but under the old rules, they could not have any blacks holding the priesthood because people did not know what race the great-grandparents were so they had to change the rules. In the short version, it was about expansion and money.
Joesph Smith has already reincarnated into a new body and can be seen on Sister Wives seems his soul loves having multiple wives
That hat and stones thing was nothing more than folk magic....He started a religion with folk magic.......and people fell for it.
actually, he started a business "finding lost treasures" and used the stones/hat method to find stuff for others, collecting a fee for his services. When that business fell apart as you would expect any 'magic' act that makes false claims, he moved on to religion.
5:50 *Was taught to (Counsel of 50) Kirtland, (Counsel of 700) Salt Lake, individuals receiving 2nd Anointing. The Endowment Ceremony isn't in the scriptures either.*
Evil cult.
What makes it evil?
I can give you a list of 10 more! :)
😂
If they would have taught me this decades ago as a convert i would have ran away so fast. I was a 5 time Young Woman President and when I discovered that my leadership had knowingly lied to me about their history and the rock and hat I was completely devastated 💔
We must always use proper discernment.
To ask of God James 1:5.
To not be content with things which require assumptions.
To seek what the reasoning behind it was, etc.
Without thinking in the Spirit, we are not very pleasing to God.
Now do a video explaining the complexity of the Book of Mormon. Was Joseph a prophet or was he a literary savant? There is no in between. Which one is it?
I actually *should* do a few more videos on the BoM, we really don't have many on our channel yet.
My thoughts - even if Joseph really did have supernatural experiences that brought forth the Book of Mormon, that doesn't automatically make Joseph a prophet or the BoM true.
1 John 4 warns us about false spirits-one can have a real supernatural encounter...but that encounter doesn't immediately make something true. We must test the spirits, and test supposed prophets by evaluating their actions and their teachings.
@@GLM read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover and then explain the complexity. People have tried and tried to explain how it came to be. At first the excuse was Joseph was too dumb to produce such a work, then it morphed into the idea that Joseph was a genius with literary abilities surpassing even Shakespeare. I’m interested how you would explain away the intricacies and complexity that is scripture or the Book of Mormon. It has yet to be explained by anti Mormons like yourself.
@@j.d.westphal6949 My point above - it could have been demonically sourced.
@@GLM tell me you haven’t read the Book of Mormon without telling me you haven’t read the BoM. 😂😂😂
Is the Bible demonically sourced?
@@j.d.westphal6949plagiarism and made up lies, because I can take down Russell Nelson less than 5 minutes from the Bible or any of those other false prophets that the Mormon Church calls Prophets an apostles they all false
President Brigham Young expressed concern that the Latter-day Saints would “have so much confidence in their leaders” that they would “settle down in a state of blind self-security,” abandoning the responsibility to obtain their own revelation: “Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not” (Journal of Discourses, 9:150).
15:55 this is assuming you believe that the bible, most of which was written after the deaths of not only the 12 apostles, but also the 70 disciples. also its assuming you believe the currently-accepted versions of the gospels and epistles and acts (even the acts had some variance, and the only "proof" we really have the epistles were written by paul during his life ARE the acts, and theres quite a bit of proof the gospels were altered to fit the supposedly-earlier-written epistles), and it assumes you dont believe the dozens of other gospels that didnt make the cut in the 4th century for the compiled bible. most importantly, it assumes you trust this helter skelter of books and letters are in anyway trustworthy - i mean, the most quoted part of the bible is the "he who is without sin may cast the first stone" parable, in which the apostles brought a woman who was guilty and they had all the evidence to punish her, and Jesus was so annoyed that they obviously hadnt been paying any attention, he ignored them before finally uttering those eternal words - i mean, he didnt even trust them, with witnesses and proof, to carry judgement (which is something all Christians should take note of - if he didnt trust them, his apostles who experienced his ministry firsthand, to judge people, then who the fucc are you?). so he doesnt trust there judgement, and yet people trust the bible, which is almost entirely of dubious authorship, to be his word? also the stone parable is funny cus ITS NOT EVEN ACTUALLY FROM JOHN . its from another entire gospel that was allegedly "lost" - (meaning purged when the pope sent epiphanius around to slander any Christian communities that refused to pay taxes to the Pope, literally claiming there was somehow dozens of groups of hundreds of people kidnapping and killing babies to use their blood as the eucharist, yet apparently no one in the "victim" communities cared, cus theres no record of this happening, and the Pope used this as an excuse to delete whole gospels from history, at least one of which (the one which the stone parabel comes from) seems to have been all about Jesus being completely against His word being used to police or judge ANYBODY but YOURSELF)
Such a well produced video! So much gaslighting in the Mormon church. I'm glad I'm out. I'm not Christian, but I have found myself and believe in a higher power more now than ever before.
This was an interesting video, well sourced, and can assumed to be historically accurate.
Your opinion at the end, is the only piece I would push back on.
God respects human agency and gave each of us unique attributes that we carry with us.
Joseph Smith was a man. Kim Jung was a man. David Whitmer was a man. Joseph Fi Smith was a man.
Each LDS prophet has had human weaknesses and frailties, some like to admit them more than others.
Your video is merely a testament that God can take a fallible sinful man, and use that man to bring the past marvelous works.
It’s comforting to know that even a simple and fallible man such as myself can be used by God to create good works.
I pray that we as the LDS church can continue changing, continue receiving revelation, and continue doing a great good on the earth.
Christ already called us weak fallible men to take up our cross and follow him. I do not understand why you would permit yourself to be involved in an institution that has radically changed with such volatility over its short lifespan. Compare that to the 2000 year teachings of Christ which are already revealed. It is beyond frustrating watching well intentioned good people twist themselves into knots to justify their affiliation with a group on such shifting foundation
Yep, when one teaches false doctrine they will lose their soul. According to lds God just keeps changing his mind, repeatedly.
I am 40 years old and 100% we were taught that Jonah Smith looked through a stone
Super weird they walked away from the Adam-God thing, since it seems 100% internally consistent with their other stuff.
There is, and always has been since Christ's resurrection, ONE church! As Christ cannot be divided, neither can the Church.
Let’s take the time to read the gospel of Mary
He said our God is the man man MAN..
So, the Adam-God Theory does not say the Adam-God Doctrine. There is a huge difference. Too bad that Brigham isn’t here to respond.
B. Young said in the general conference that everything he says is official doctrine.
actually, all teachings of god change through time as humanity is capable of fulfilling those commands.
have you not read the bible ?
I have read the Bible, but I'd argue that there aren't teachings that have changed.
We have ONE single major transition-from Old Covenant to New Covenant (which was foretold and prophesied). Other than that, I'd argue that no commands or teachings have passed away.
What did you have in mind specifically?
I'm guessing 100% that you, gray man, have never once read the Bible to make-up such an outlandish concept without even once providing any evidence of your fictional story. If you want to invent stuff to write, remember Joe already tried that.
Ha ha...that is so wrongly funny.
@@GLM
all it takes is one to prove my point.
deuteronomy 21:18-21
"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not heed them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, to the gate of his city. And they shall say to the elders of his city, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones; so you shall put away the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear."
Matthew 18:21-35
Then Peter came to Him and asked, “Lord, how many times will my brother sin against me and I forgive him and let it go? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered him, “I say to you, not up to seven times, but seventy times seven.
that is a 100% change.
which prove my point 100%
period.
@@clydeLedford
nothing "funny" about it.
jesus completely changed the law of moses.
here's the big problem for you, and all so-called christian churches, that you refuse to acknowledge ... jesus founded his church on prophets and apostles.
the scriptures clearly tell us that, many times. and there is only one church today that has prophets and apostles.
the restored church of jesus christ.
"the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints"
because ... the church of god in the time of the prophets, was built on the foundation of the prophets, i. e. upon those doctrines and doctrinal truths delivered by them.
the church of god under the new testament, is built not only on the foundation of the prophets, but of the apostles, Rev. 21:14.
this is precisely what paul affirms in ephesians 2:20 where he says that the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, christ jesus himself being the cornerstone” (cf. rev. 21:14; also 1cor. 3:10-11 in context).
the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints is the ONLY church today built on a foundation of apostles and prophets.
anti-mormons are teaching a false gospel (just like all protestants).
Let me guess...you were rejected by an LDS girl?
When will they denounce their other planet cult stuff
How can a "prophet" of God and leader of this church be so blasphemous?
2:58 so if Young taught false doctrine then doesn't that many he was a false prophet and that the current SLC Mormons do not have to fullest of the gospel. They cannot discredit President Young without discrediting their own religion
Pretty great to see those changes.
The false doctrine is polygamy..
One of the Doctrines not brought up by Brigham Young was that for something to be put down as true it must be unanimously accepted by the First Presidency and 12 Apostles. The Adam God concept was opposed by Apostle Orson Pratt as was the restiction on blacks to the priesthood.
Did you know what other "doctrine" was not officially accepted by the First Presidency and 12 apostles? Salvation by grace qlone without works, Paul was totally on his own on that. The official position of the church was that Jewish members would keep the customs but Gentiles were only to avoid certain things.
Good video, you explain it so well
The LDS Churches greatest problem is it hedged all its bets on the notions of old would never be challenged because of the lack of fact checking ability of the times. Fast forward to 2024, items such as the gospel topic essays combined with the internet, has exposed all this nonsense. Too bad the prophets (profits) couldn’t see that coming.
The sign of a false prophet was not to test their teachings. It was “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” Matt. 7:16 Now, you may argue that “fruits” refers to “teachings,” but I think it has more to do with how they lived their lives, what they did with their lives, or what impact on society that their teachings produced. In my mind, that is the test.
No one man pronounces the doctrine of the Church. In today’s Church, doctrine only comes with the unanimous consent, or pronouncement, of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. No doubt, this is the policy now because of the mistakes of the past. What Brigham Young said may have been disagreed with at the time by others with sincere beliefs.
They were men. As men they were subject to mistakes, and to misspeak. We have never had the doctrine that the prophets (even Joseph Smith) and apostles were other than fallible men.
Let’s begin with the fact that many truths were restored through the prophet, Joseph Smith. But not all truth was restored. There were many things alluded to for which there was no definitive answer. I’m sure that Brigham Young and Orson Pratt thought they had figured things out sometimes. They were wrong. They may have spoken of their own speculation as if it were scripture. That doesn’t make it right. Doing so was one of the many mistakes that they made.
Jesus being married is pure speculation. Of course, God could reveal the answer to an individual, but evidently he hasn’t thought it necessary to reveal it as doctrine to the Church. To me, it makes sense, but knowing whether that is true or not is my own speculation, and totally unnecessary to my salvation.
I am a committed member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The “fruits” of the teachings of the Church have been wonderful for me and my family. I get great satisfaction from the emphasis on family, on living a moral life, and on helping my fellow man. The speculations of past leaders are inconsequential as far as my happiness goes, and as far as my salvation. I have seen this church change so many people’s lives for the better. That is the “fruit.”
The way to tell whether a person is a true prophet or not is the same way that one would test that Jesus is Lord. 1 Corinthians 12:3. Stop bashing others and seek for the Spirit of truth. It will change you for the better and open your eyes to the deeper truths about God, mankind and this world.
We're given a number of tests for prophets in the Bible, and while I agree that one can't deny that Jesus is Lord and be a prophet - that's not the entirety of the test for a genuine prophet.
Out of curiosity - what do you think that Paul meant by saying "Jesus is Lord" there?
@@GLM 1 Corinthians 12:3 shows us the ultimate way of knowing the truth about anything i.e. by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:19-21,
Matthew 16:16-18 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
All the miracles and teachings that Peter had seen and heard were more powerfully added to by the witness of the Holy Ghost given him from the Father.
Jesus is Lord means that Jesus is the Saviour and Redeemer of this world, the Only Begotten Son of God the Father and subject to no one but the Father.
you wrote: _"stop bashing others"_
but if you look at quotes from your past 'leadership' you'll see negative comments towards Catholics, methodist, evangelical, and others. It seems to be very hypocritical especially when I see current members refer to non-members as 'so-called Christians". It seems you don't have the 'spirit of truth' yourself but then expect it from others. That's hypocrisy.
God Loves Mormons has not made a passing comment about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints but is dedicated to putting down the Church and actively and continuously exercises a campaign against it. True Christian’s (which GLM claims to be) don’t do this. Romans 14:1-3. GLM does remind me of a scripture though. Revelation 12:10.
@@AdamEyers True Christians do this against falsehoods and false doctrines. Romans 14 is talking about "opinions" - not issues of doctrine.
> "And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 2:24-25).
> Speaking about elders - "He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it." (Titus 1:9)
> "I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 3).
Even Jesus would go to the temple and speak, correct, and rebuke religious leaders. While it is TRUE that we shouldn't quarrel over these "opinions" - we should take care to contend for the faith.
The curse of Cain doctrine did not originate with the latter Day saints. In fact Joseph Smith disagreed with such ideas. Curse of King doctrine came from the Protestants. Latter-Day saints missionaries brought it with them from the deep south. And because Latter-Day saints believe in the Bible, some of them believed this kind of interpretation what the southern baptist had concerning the black people by reading the Bible. There has always been dissension in this View about the priesthood and the blacks in the church. On Joseph Smith himself even said apart black priests in the church in the early years of the church. This was a similar contention that what Peter and Paul had concerning the non-jewish members of the early Christian Church as well. Unfortunately this contention lasted much longer than it should have. But thank God it was settled once and for all.
The difference here is that Southern Baptists and other Protestants can point to their own Scriptures and say, “Ah, this teaching is not aligned with the Bible. I am not bound by those who say otherwise and must reject these false teachings.”
Whereas in the LDS church you have the black skin rhetoric used in LDS scriptures and prophets/apostles who are affirming the teaching. Brigham even said he never preached a sermon that couldn’t be considered Scripture. The problem here is that you have bound yourselves to prophets who fail the test of New Testament leadership.
As for your comparison to Peter… Peter distanced himself from the Gentiles “because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.” While this is clearly sinful, it isn’t in the same category as blatantly authoritatively teaching that one race can’t inherit salvation, something which flies in the face of what the Scripture clearly teaches. Those leaders who taught this must be rejected entirely as legitimate prophets and apostles.
@@BNichols021in the Bible the first high priest really was Moses in Moses was black all the 12 tribes of Israel are black people, Adam the first man was black he was made in the image of God Jesus tells you he was black when John saw God in Revelation chapter 1 verses 14 and 15 he was black so how is Cain going to be cursed with dark skin when his mom and dad was already black all the priests in the Bible were black men every last one of them God's Church true church was a nation of black people that's Bible 101
Joseph Smith played both sides of the issue. Your funny speculations about Southerners is so wrong. B. Young was a hi up Freemason, and Freemasonry bylaws stated in the Freemasons Indiana Monitor, States that Blacks cannot be a Freemason. The British Monarch gave some Black lodge charters to use Blacks in their Communist & NWO schemes. :.
Um... it is in The Book of Mormon.. missionaries didn't write that. YES.. It was protestant doctrine which is another proof The Book of Mormon is FALSE. It is nothing but a fictional book presented as fact to support 19th century protestant teaching..
@@jameswines6589😂😂😂 You are very mistaken. Moses and Aaron were brothers and it specifically states Aaron was married to a black woman. What would be the reason to point that out if Moses was black. The hair is like that of wool is referring to the color white not the texture.
AND THEN shall they know their Redeemer, who is JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God; AND THEN shall they be gathered in from the four quarters of the earth unto their own lands, from whence they have been dispersed; yea, as the Lord liveth so shall it be. Amen.
You can only know if your born again!
We never taught the Adam God theory. The Adam God theory is the fundamentalist interpretation of Brigham Young's teachings regarding the matter. Brigham Young did teach that Adam was our God under the context that he is an always was subordinate to God the Father and Jesus Christ. Moses was also a God to Pharoah according to God in Exodus 7:1
Your conclusions that you listed are not the ones I came to. For example, Brigham Young taught Adam came in a Celestial body, our spirits are Celestial bodies but you implied automatically that Adam had a resurrected body.
I don't think Brigham Young in this sermon was talking about Elohim. He taught that there were many gods just like Joseph did. Adam is a god now and he is our direct ancestor. He is the one that is first in line in authority is what Brigham Young is saying.
just thinking about the words after the fruit was eaten, " he has become like one of us knowing good and evil"
'Like' is used in similes.
We know good and evil.
Adam and Eve never became gods. They received the death penalty for one sin.
@@Elizabeth-rk3do its reassuring the tree was put in front of their noses, wonders why satan actually got into the garden of eden, to tempt Eve, wondered if they Adam an Eve had a belly Button each, all these questions, but in the end Elizabeth
Adam knew Eve they raised Cain an Abel,.
Grateful that we may all know good an evil, an raise our own families, .We all hope our death too is a temporal one an not one of the spirit.