Yes.
2007-05-02 10:06:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
You missed some key factors as to why we tell human beings to wish and get "the fuzzies" as you place them. there is not any church on the planet that follows what's asserted in Matthew greater suitable than the Mormon church. "Ye shall be responsive to them by using their end result". interior the e book of Mormon on the top, there's a project given to all of us who reads it. It says that when you have examine those issues ask God in the event that they are authentic. (Moroni 10:3-5). In Matthew it says by using their end result you would be responsive to if a prophet is authentic or not. It additionally says that a prophet is the two a prophet or he's not. a stable tree can not convey approximately evil fruit. for this reason we concentration lots on the e book of Mormon. If the e book of Mormon is authentic then it proves that Joseph Smith became right into a prophet through fact something that's authentic can not come from an evil source. The e book of Mormon is the fruit of the prophet Joseph Smith. as a manner to be responsive to whether that's stable, we could desire to wish to be responsive to whether that's stable or undesirable. yet in addition, decide it. What does it communicate approximately? Does it make experience? could this be what God could say? I even have executed all of those issues. And in accordance to my information, I truly have faith that I even have won an answer that the e book of Mormon is stable. It teaches approximately Jesus Christ and has many memories that coach us approximately faith and repentance. through fact of what I examine in Matthew, i be responsive to that Joseph Smith is a prophet. edit Sorry I misunderstood which you have been quoting the Mormon on your question. Mormons are basically human beings. now and returned we dont clarify issues the final way. each and every thing else I pronounced holds authentic. @ Seeker you dont be responsive to what the two the e book of Mormon or what the Pearl of super value teaches. they don't contradict one yet another and the countless different information you furnish is basically undemanding incorrect.
2016-10-14 09:19:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by doloris 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Meg has it, so I' too late with the link.
Be aware of the conundrum mormons make for themselves as explained by Richard Packham:
Mormons who insist that they want facts, but are reluctant to accept facts from any source to analyze them themselves. They want to reject anything from "anti-Mormons."
Mormons also reject anything by someone who has never been a Mormon. "How could they know anything about the church?" That seems illogical - does this mean than no one can write about the Roman Empire because no one today has ever been a citizen of the Roman Empire?
Mormons feel justified in rejecting anything written by ex-Mormons as well. "They simply want to justify their having left the true church! They have an axe to grind. They can't leave it alone!" That same argument could apply to the fresh Mormon convert from Catholicism who wants to go on a mission to convert Catholics. Does that new Mormon know nothing about Catholicism?
2007-05-02 14:10:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Dances with Poultry 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes, it is true; Apart from the Documentary over the last two nights from pbs, that you can still see on line with extra info; there is a free DVD available from an organisation whose name escapes me, anyways, I am being sent a copy, but I got their details by looking at fair.com which is a mormon/LDS apologetics site that has lied like crazy about this area.
More is likely due in the DVDs , books, Lawsuits, and other material coming out.
2007-05-02 09:41:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mictlan_KISS 6
·
3⤊
4⤋
No. Unless you mean got married to divorced or widowed women, not to other men's wives.
Polygamy wasn't only practiced by Mormons back then.
2007-05-02 09:55:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
you need to finish the question with: after the other men had died and the ladies were widowed?
-Yes, plural marriage was practiced at the time (hasn't since the 1890's) and most of the women who entered into this practice were widows.
2007-05-02 09:46:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by daisyk 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
I don't know a LOT about Joseph's married life. But I don't think so. It just doesn't make sense and is not consistent with other church teachings.
2007-05-02 09:46:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tonya in TX - Duck 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
Purely and simply, the answer is YES. He took wives away from their husbands.
2007-05-02 10:03:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by Polyhistor 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Please disregard all of the answers above... they are blatant attacks and lacking little things called facts.
Can anyone back this statement up with fact?
No. Where did you hear that?
If you mean widows, or divorced women, then yes. Wives? No.
2007-05-02 09:43:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
I don't know that, honey, but I do know that he was a drunk cowboy who pretended to be psychic and predicted the future by staring at a pair of amber stones. He also said that being black was a curse from God and so kept all blacks from joining in his cult.
Take care,
El Rey.
2007-05-02 09:43:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Humberto M 6
·
2⤊
4⤋