Deseret News | Evangelical preaches at Salt Lake Tabernacle

Reader comments
Evangelical preaches at Salt Lake Tabernacle

Page:
< Previous
1
2

ToLaguna | 1:54 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Show me from the Bible where it is said that the earth is flat, and that being used by Catholics to believe that.

To Marshall | 2:01 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

This discussion is all speculation and a member of any of the multitudes of Christian sects as well as Mormon, Jew, Muslim, atheist, etc. could discuss this doctrinal issue until they were blue in the face, but IT WOULDN'T MATTER.

That is not the point of the article here. The point as I read it is that we need to live the precepts of our religions. Love your neighbor does not mean love your neighbor unless he's Mormon and in that case, lie and throw accusations around and make anonymous false allegations on blogs and doing this will assure that you are a good Christian.

"WE need to love the Mormons, but surely not at the cost of abandoning even the minimum elements of objectivity." That's what Marshall R Motz said. Perhaps he has a special edition of the Bible that exempts the "love one another" part from applying to Mormons.

To Marshall | 2:07 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

If you google the name of the original commentor, you can find the discussion out of which his comment came and why he posted here. Wow. A lot of vitriol and misrepresentations and half truths out there.

Comments continue below

To "Laughter is the best..." | 2:09 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Being a new kid in the town, I have been invited for a "dinner" at a Mormon friend's home. At the end of the dinner, the atmosphere has been changed into reading the Book Of Mormon and praises to Joseph Smith. Whatelse to say than "Trapped"! Talking about my experience to another friend who is not a Mormon, he had the same experience from this Mormon friend also. We all have laugher with Mormons especially when it comes to SPECULATIONS!

Talkin' Jesus Here | 2:15 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

What happen to the subject Jesus, talk on here?

TO Iaguna/Laguna:

Let me break it to you gently, the earth is not flat. I believe Christopher Columbus is the one who thought at one time that the world was flat, but he soon got over it.

SLMG | 2:17 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

More Mormon urban legends, don't we just love em!!!
Stick to the Scriptures and stop the second guessing.

ExecutorIoh | 2:25 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

This line of thought is ridiculous. Look at all of the time that has been wasted by speculation. Nobody knows the marital status of the Savior, so let's just leave it at that. You have your beliefs and I have mine. Whichever is right, great! In the long run, it really doesn't matter.

BELIEVE IN HIM | 3:28 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

TO EXCALUBER,

JESUS ALWAYS MATTERS! He is our savior and without him we are all be in big trouble big time. He died for our sins. Could any of us do that for the whole world? There are days however, that i would certainly like to do so, but I know it wouldn't be possible for none of us have the power for this sacrafice without the help of Gods. So we need to appreciate this great man for what he stood for. Plus, throw away all the twisted crosses that resemble his death where he was brutally killed. The cross was a weapon for the murder our savior. It's ugly! Even satan worshipers wear them upside down. GRIZZLY!

The answer is NO | 3:50 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I repeat what has been said earlier: Christ's marital status cannot be found in Church doctrine nor does it appear in any revelation or scripture of the LDS faith. Do not confuse speculation with revelation.

The prophet Joseph Smith wrote: "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

Since God has not revealed this matter it cannot be counted as Church doctrine. The only way a Mormon should believe in the matter at hand is if it is revealed to the prophet.

Answer YES | 4:26 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Your prophet Joseph Smith said God revealted to him that Lamanites are the principal ancestors of the American Indians. Now that has been changed in the Book Of Mormon. Which prophet got the revelation now that the Lamanites are among and not the principal ancestors of the American Indians? Dear Friend, how do you spin that subject with speculation and revelation?

true story | 4:55 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

A temple-worthy Mormon man told me this years ago:
"The problem with most Mormons is they have problems discerning revelations."

texas mom | 5:43 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Would someone please get this article printed in the southern newspapers?

To: Answer YES | 5:48 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Once again you are confusing the sources and church doctrine. Joseph Smith DID NOT say that the Lamanites were principal ancestors of the American Indians. The Introduction to the Book of Mormon was written by Bruce R McConkie and is not considered doctrine, just an introduction. Apostles have opinions just like LDS members have opinions, the same can be said for all faiths. There is a set doctrine but people are free to speculate as they would. The difference is that they receive revelations occasionally on church doctrine.

Re: Answer YES | 5:49 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Well, DNA says it all! no two ways about it.

Steve - Corrections... | 5:52 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Marshall Motz: As a life long LDS person I can say I've never heard it taught by us that Jesus had 3 wives here on Earth. The ONLY specualtion I've heard is Jesus had one wife, who MAY have been Mary Magdalene. Why and how would Jesus be married to his own mother (Mary) as you suggest?

As to anyone who thinks Jesus being married makes Him less devine, I don't see how. Jesus always led by example so if we're expected to marry, naturally He would do it too.

So my answer to YesorNO is, Yes... I believe Jesus was/is married or at least might have been. I'd never rule it out. I like many others believe the wedding He attended in the Bible might have been His own.

Keep in mind the Bible has passed through many hands, back long ago when the Catholic Church started and put the Bible together it's entirely possible they edited out any direct reference to Jesus being married (as they apparently think a man more holy without sex, which is why their priests don't marry... unless I'm mistaken, Catholics feel free to correct me).

Rick too | 5:55 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Just a minute here ! I see a definite trend anytime I read an article regarding Mitt/politics/LDS etc. etc. There are a few individuals out there who get their jollies with their provocative, highly inflammatory comments which are nowhere close to the truth. They post the most disgusting lies then just sit back and watch as we LDS folks reply and laugh their disgusting heads off. I read a comment yesterday about how we LDS despise the Constitution and Mitt has an agenda which follows that concept. And today we read that we believe Christ had three wives. I attended BYU after serving a mission in 1966-1968. So I have been around for a few years like many of you. Never have I heard the likes of this and lotsa other outrageous lies which pop up on the internet.
Great article DN, and intended to show positive relations between LDS and our Evangelical friends.
Most of us are trying to live as best we can plus trying to build bridges with our neighbors of other faiths and ethnic origins. We are all trying to make our neighborhoods and communities and schools better.

laguna | 6:00 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

It is rather comical to hear true-believers in Mormonism, Islam, Catholicism or any doctrinaire religion try to explain how the faux paus promoted by their churches for hundreds of years really arent as absurd as they sound. When the Catholics imprisoned scientists (Galileo) during the dark ages for promoting that Genesis' describing that the planets and sun revolving around the earth was not correct. Or the Mormon church disavowing previous leaders laughable statements that have been disproven. Religion is evolving and constantly trying to cover its path so as to not appear absurd.

TYLER | 6:21 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I like to hear a story about honest Christians like this one. I heard an eye opening comment about how we compare other religions. We should not look at our best characteristics or history and another religion's worst. Compare best to best recieving your sources from people knowledgeable in that religion. (Not from outside sources.)

I'm ashamed to say that I have sometimes done exactly what the above says not to do. As a member of the LDS church recieving all of this negative attention and hearing twisted lies and half truths has made me realize I shouldn't be hypocritical and should look at all religions fairly. That's my two cents, just thought I'd share.

Ron in OC | 7:48 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

I just love it when people I have never met tell me what I believe.

Paperboy | 8:41 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Wow, must really be a dry news week. Or the Deseret Morning News is trying to pull out the stops (maybe even a miracle from the dusty archives?) in the attempt to position the LDS church as mainstream, respected and pragmatic, with the hope of doing something to help salvage Mitt's crumbling presidential campaign.

Head Spinning | 8:46 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

You know, I don't care if Jesus was married or not, to 1, 2, or 15 wives. What does it matter? He is the Savior and Redeemer of the world. Yours and mine. I guess at some point in time when we cross the veil we will find out all of these questions, Ya think? PS AND I don't care if you are a Jew, Budhist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Baptist or whatever! I am a member of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day saints and have never heard it taught that Jesus was even married. But if he was, so what? Does it change anything? There are so many bitter, hateful people in this world and I've just read a few articles from some of them. Get a life, do something good for someone else. Serve your neighbor---You'll be a lot happier.

Jesus was normal | 8:58 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Polygamy is the evil designs of men. It is no divine practice. It is the man made practice of a self idulging man. These guys have no more potential than that of a great ape. Jesus was not a polygamist. He was normal!

Ron in OC | 9:22 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

Ya know what I like about all this. The article was interesting and positive and most of the comments have nothing to do with the article.

Mohan | 10:19 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

You guys are funny. Many strange comments here.

But man, this speech in the tabernacle is HUGE. We will never come to a consensus until after Christ returns, on belief. Until then we will always believe differently. But there is nothing wrong with that. What I like here is people tearing down some pretty huge walls and trying to gain understanding of each others beliefs instead of just saying I am right and you should get out if you don't like it. This is big for Mormons to welcome in a fellow Christian of a different denomination, and was even bigger of Mouw to also come to grips with Mormons. I love it. This is a great day. Don't be upset - he didn't compromise, he gained understanding, something we should all try. If you are upset, you need better understanding yourself. Keep working on it.

Idaho Kid | 11:16 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

The problem in these discussions seems to be based on the false assumption that the reproductive act is inherently sinful. The only time when it is is in the case of adultery, fornication and other such abuses of this part of the human experience. If it was sinful, why did God command us to be fruitful and replenish the earth. It seems like we have a contradiction here. Did God say to multiply and at the same time say it is a sin. I don't think The Supreme Being is the author of confusion. I think he leaves that up to some men.

to jesus was normal | 11:32 p.m. Jan. 2, 2008

abraham issac and jacob practiced polygamy as a commandment from god. it is in the bible

Spuds | 4:22 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

I'm enjoying the knee jerk reaction of many who want to vilify the church, but don't know that Moroni told Joseph Smith that the church would grow the more it was opposed. Historically that has been proven, so bring it on!

Bookaholic | 4:53 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

Wonderful, spiritual people can have opinions that are wrong. Orson Pratt thought something, and he was a leader in the early church. So what? Doesn't make what he thought correct. It's his OPINION, nothing more.

Why is it that Mormons have to answer for everything every church leader has ever said, but all other churches and religions get a pass? Methodist's Wesley said the borders of hell are lined with the skulls of infants that died without baptism. The Catholic church has had quite a history from the Inquision, to the sale of indulgences, to married popes, to the pedophilia scandals. All religious groups have odd practices and things in their backgrounds. Why is it that the LDS are the only ones who have to answer for them?

We love God and try to love and serve others. For this devotion, we're ridiculed and are told we aren't even Christian. Baloney. God knows better.

This article was a good one. It is nice for the world to be made aware that some decent, thinking evangelicals accept our love and devotion for Christ as legitimate. We don't need the recognition but do appreciate it.

Thanks for DN for reprinting the article.

wow how things have changed | 6:10 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

Before you jump on me for being an anti-mormon,I was born in the Church in 1947 served a mission married in the temple, and have 9 kids all of whom are active. Don't be angry with me because of something you do not want to believe. (Heleman 13:26-28)talks of Samuel the laminitie. I do not profess to be a prophet but Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Hyde, and Orson Pratt were. Just as much as the 12 today are. I was wrong about the Heber C. Kimball quote. It was not him but Orson Hyde (JD 2:210) Before you start condemning the JD read the title page where Brigham Young states how careful they were in compiling these talks, and they were approved by him. Brigham Young
also states that Jesus was married. (JD 13:309) as did Orson Pratt in the Seer p.172. There are your quotes. There is also the gospel of Phillip (you can find it on the internet). It is an early Christian gospel that was not included in the New Testament. There it states that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. In the 40day ministy of Jesus. Hugh Nibley comments on it (fair.org)

OneVote | 7:14 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

That explains why they had to close the Tabernacle; to repair the damage. Now it'll withstand hellfire, damnation, and earthquakes.

To wow and others | 7:20 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

I'm a member of the church. I served a mission. My family has been in the church since the 1830s. I have # children, all active in the church.

Please don't quote Orson Hyde, Orson Pratt, Hugh Nibley, or anyone else to tell me what I believe. They were all as human as I and also prone to error and speculation.

Let me fill you in on a little secret. Most members of the church don't even know who Hugh Nibley is. They also don't know who the two Orsons are and it doesn't matter, since they are not Jesus and do not need to believe in any of these three individuals in order to be saved.

Nice | 8:34 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

It's nice to be nice.

Perplexed | 8:51 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

Can someone tell me where in the Bible it tells of baptizing babies and what passages tell about Jesus laying down his resurrected body to become a spirit being again? We read prophecies of His coming, His Birth, His life, His death, His resurection, His ascension, and His second coming. But where is His body buried and when did hHe give die again. Wouldn't that (made up) event be important enough to include in the Bible?

2 cents and more | 8:55 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

I read this when it happened a few years ago. I enjoyed reading it then, and am now enjoying forwarding it to every huckalemming who is voting for Huckabee only because he's a Southern Baptist preacher, and thinks LDS are evil cult members. If anyone knows folks in Iowa, forward this to them, and ask them to keep forwarding it on.

wow how we have changed | 9:40 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

to wow and others. You write off these men OP, OH, and Nibley as if they have done nothing for the Church. O. Hyde traveled 18 month Israel at the request of Joseph Smith to dedicate the land of Israel for the return of the Jews. He did it without purse or scrip. He was pennyless when he started and pennyless when he came back but the Lord provided for him. Orson Pratt spent his whole life defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hugh Nibley has also spent his life defending the prophet Josep Smith. Yet you pass them off as nothing in your mind. I can not wait until you get to have a talk with each of them and compare what you have done for the Gospel compared to them. good luck with that. what offends me so much with people of your opinion, is you do not realize what these men had to do to get the Church in the position where it now is. what have you done? I reveir these men. I am grateful that they were there when they were needed. they left on missions when ever God called.

kjaerbye | 9:47 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

The comment about baptizing babies comes from the Catholic Doctrine of "Original Sin" and I was baptized as a baby at birth Lutheran. However the scriptures does talk about an age of accountability, which the LDS Church and the Church of Christ both believe in, having knowledge to know what the covenant of baptism is and being accountable for one's own sins and not Adams's sins. The Age of accountability is not made up by Joseph Smith; it's talked about in the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament.

Aldea | 9:57 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

About Jesus having three wives: Jesus being over the age of 30, may have had one wife, but not three wives. The New Testament writers of the events during Christï¿½s days, do not state or indicate his marriage, however some speculate he was married. It was Jewish Custom for men over 30 to be married, I suppose he did practice that custom after all he was born a Jew from the House of David.

momof3 | 9:59 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

During Moses' time, or Abraham's, or all of the old prophets who have lived, not everything they said became record. Only actual revelation would be recorded since it was hard and time consuming to make their records. Fast forward to modern times where it is not hard to record what people say. Almost everything that has come out of our leaders' mouths since the 1800s has been recorded, whether it was just their "personal opinions" or true LDS doctrine. Everything has been recorded and you can find it all in the abundance of books floating out there. There are many ideas that are "speculated" about, but the church will never put out a doctrine that is pure "speculation".

Objective free thought | 10:00 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

20 'some odd' years ago, I became inactive in the church. Coming from a strong LDS family, my family was disappointed, but always supportive of my decision. As I have gotten older, I have been focused on finding truth in my life...why am I here? Where did I come from?...and Where am I going? While I have great respect for all faiths, the LDS church is the only way, in my opinion that you can find these answers (with all due respect). I am not blogging here with an agenda, because I am still inactive, but I pray and seek spiritual guidance everyday, by the way all of us have that option available to us. As a fairly educated man I recently started to write a book, with all of the internet access and information available, it is still quite a challenge for me...and I am drawn to a simple fact...how did a fairly uneducated young man write (if as the naysayers say he did)quite possibly the most complicated book of history of all time. The answer read the B of M seek out the truth and pray!

Billy Bob | 10:50 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

Thanks " nice" I agree...It IS nice to be nice

Al | 11:23 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

I would agree that we can't take every word spoken by LDS leadership as doctrine. It's sometimes very difficult to keep in mind that these are men just like me with biases and products of their generation. Although they will receive revelation/doctrine, they mostly speak of their own accord taking advantage of their free agency. Sure it would be incredible if these men were infallible and only acted as a mouth piece for God, but that would be too easy and would require no faith.

Thank You | 11:26 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

Re: To Thomas
You are right in saying that Jesus was not ever married. Or at least it would be very very unlikely.
Men married later in the middle east during and before the life of Christ. About 40 years old is the typical age for marriage of a male. There are several sources for this from literature of the era. (Bible, On Man in The Universe, and others less known.) There can be exceptions to this'rule', for which Jesus doesn't seem to qualify.
Also, people married relatives, in those days. There is no defined family relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
If some of you have been taught to believe Jesus Christ was married by well meaning Institute or Seminary teachers, you have been mistaught.(sorry)
It is difficult to go into depth about a subject like this in so short a space, but Jesus being a single man during his life time is indeed very very logical.
So can you tell me how to get started on studying the ministry of Thomas in India, or anything more about this please (if you are still out there!)

Errors don't help | 11:41 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

To Laguna:
You are not the only one to keep repeating the mistaken idea that Galileo was imprisoned, threatened, etc because he said the earth wasn't the center of the universe. Neither did anyone believe the earth was flat when Columbus crossed the ocean. Hermetic /Platonic philosophy was freely taught in Italian universities previous to these men and no one went to prison!
The argument between the Catholic Church and Galileo was not a science vs religion argument, bur a religion vs religion argument.
Would anyone like to know what really happened?
I don't know if this will get printed because it is a little off topic, but the other ones did, so I am giving it a try.

laguna | 11:54 a.m. Jan. 3, 2008

To Errors,
If you are of the OPINION that the Catholic church didnt punish scholars and scientists who correctly argued against the churchs errroneous doctrines, then you have attempted to rewrite history.

Steve - Re: Thank You 1/3 @11:26 | 12:18 p.m. Jan. 3, 2008

You do realize that today or at anytime in history, just because many or the majority tend to do something doesn't mean everyone does it too. So I'm sorry... unless you are secretly hiding a time machine you used to go back and see how it really was, you can't state as fact that Jesus was NOT married. He might have been or He might not, nobody today knows for certain.

Paul | 3:50 p.m. Jan. 4, 2008

final ...

, and Elder Orson Pratt himself sanctioned the repudiation.ï¿½ (B. H. Roberts, Defense of the Faith and the Saints, Vol.2, p.294)

The official 1865 repudiation is found here: Messages of the First Presidency, Vol.2, p.238 - p.239

I find it interesting that the Church repudiated this source in 1865, then again in 1907 (Robertï¿½s) and now I need to again in 2008 after another century.

Another argument that should not be ignored is that Psalms 45:9 may have been referring to Christ only symbolically. These ï¿½wivesï¿½ may refer to churches while the ï¿½Queenï¿½ refers to The Church. This is the position that most modern scholars will take if they are embarrassed by the thought that God might be a polygamist like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were.

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.