….then the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, along with any sect related to that cult, is totally unworthy of anyone’s respect.
Indeed, I would only expect insane people to ever take such a religion seriously!
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Dale Husband's Intellectual Rants 
I;ve seen this before. This is from Ed Decker’s “The God Makers.” — I did my own research…. This video is basically true.
The video has some truth in it, but it mixes much that is false. It also takes many speculations from members and calls them true doctrine, when they are not.
In essence the video is false, because it does not accurate portray the actual doctrine of the LDS Church.
Shematwater, please specify the falsehoods of this video. It did indeed come from the film “The God Makers”, made by Ed Decker, who claimed to be an ex-Mormon. I saw the entire film at a Baptist church. I then bought the book of the same title, also written by Decker.
Eloheim is not a name but a title. It is held by the Father and means “Head of the Gods.” It will be the Title held by Christ as the Head of our generation.
(Dale Husband: Since the Bible says there can be only ONE God, how can there be a “Head of the Gods”? Ancient Hebrew tribal religion may have originally been polytheistic, but by 500 BC it had evolved into Judaism, a strictly monotheistic faith. Christianity evolved from Judaism. If Joseph Smith really wanted to restore the original church of Jesus Christ, he should have been a “Messianic Jew”, because that is what Jesus and his desciples were, and he should have rejected the teachings of Paul.)
Our Father was the Savior of his world, and thus had been elevated to Godhood before he was born into mortality, just as Christ did.
(Dale Husband: The idea that God was once man and man can become a God is nowhere found in the Bible. Rather, God is eternal and while he may have made man in the image of God, they are not the same.)
Celestial Sex: No one knows how things actually work in Heaven. Yes we will have spirit children, but the method is not known and is thus speculation of members, and not doctrine.
Lucifer is a Son of the Morning. We do not know what position he is in in the order of births. The only one we know this information for is Christ, for he is the eldest. We do not know if Lucifer is second.
(Dale Husband: Most Christians beleive that Lucifer was an angel, and angels are not destined to become Gods, but to serve the one true God forever.)
It was not the proposal of Jesus. The Plan is the same plan that all men have followed throughout eternity. When Lucifer stood it was to offer himself as Savior, but it was also to present a different plan than that which the Father had laid out.
The war in Heaven: Black skin was not the curse that is being referenced. The curse was being denied the Priesthood while on this Earth. Black skin was the mark, and it was a mark used on others as well (such as the Lamanites).
(Dale Husband: It’s still racism and thus unethical. People have black skin because they, or their ancestors, lived in parts of the world, like Africa or Australia, where the intensity of the sun would have burned their skin if they had been white. The increased pigment protects blacks from sunburn. There is nothing inferior about one’s skin color, period. Also, there is not a shred of evidence of any connection between the ancient Hebrews and any American culture prior to the time of Columbus. The closest living relatives to Native Americans are thought to be Mongoloid peoples like those of the Siberians, the Chinese and Japanese, NOT Semetic peoples.)
Also, not all the valiant were blessed to be born into “Mormon” families. Many were sent as prophets in a time when there were few faithful (such as Jeremiah) and some were given other callings (such as Martin Luther or George Washington).
(Dale Husband: All of whom are white, is that correct?)
No one ever Taught that Eloheim came to Earth as Adam. This is completely false. It was speculated by Brigham Young that Adam (or Micheal) was a God in the grand counsel, but it was never speculated that he was Eloheim. Brigham Young was actually very clear that they were not the same person.
Christ being married is again only speculation, even on the part of Brother Pratt. The same goes for him having children. We do not deny the possibility, nor do we claim knowledge of fact.
Also, Joseph Smith never once claimed to be descended from Christ. He was a descendent of Joseph through Ephraim. Christ was descended from Judah. It is thus impossible for this claim to be true.
(Dale Husband: Unless there was later intermarriage between the tribes of Judah and Ephraim. In fact, by the time of Jesus, the tribal system that was so prominent in the Old Testament had been abandoned for centuries. In any case, there is no evidence that Jesus ever married or had children. Otherwise, that would have been mentioned in the Gospels.)
Just a minor point: We do not know if Moroni was the last of the Nephites alive. He was the last of their prophets to keep a record, and this is the extent of our knowledge.
Joseph Smith was not a treasure seeker, and was actually known as a very sober and honest youth until after he shared his first vision. It was after this that the accounts of his “tall tales” and “treasure hunting” started to circulate.
I am out of time right now, and was unable to comment on the last few minutes of the video, though I probably will later.
I know many of these things do not seem big, and some are not. However, some are. But even for the ones that aren’t, the number of errors that are made make the video a false video. As I said before, there is some truth, but the amount of error and false teachings is enough to make the video false.
You said: “Since the Bible says there can be only ONE God, how can there be a “Head of the Gods”?”
There is only one God, but there are many gods. God, with the capital G, is a title. Thus, one can be a god in the sense that they have all knowledge and power, and still not be God which has they authority.
Also, the Bible actually supports the existence of many gods, and at three who are given the title of God. These would be the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
At the time of Abraham this was fully understood. It was lost by the Jews over the years, and then restored by Christ. The four gospels are the greatest evidence to the existence of three separate beings all called God.
Thus, when Joseph Smith was called to restore the gospel it was not the corrupted gospel of the Jews, but the original truth had by the ancient fathers like Abraham.
You said: “The idea that God was once man and man can become a God is nowhere found in the Bible.”
Psalms 82: 6 “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.”
John 10: 34 “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?”
Romans 8: 17 “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.”
2 Corinthians 3: 18 “But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.”
1 John 3:2 “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”
All of these verses testify to the potential for mortal men to become gods like our Father and his Son Jesus Christ. We will be like him, have the same glory, be glorified together as a joint-heir. The Bible teaches this very plainly to anyone who wishes to read it.
You said: “Most Christians beleive that Lucifer was an angel, and angels are not destined to become Gods, but to serve the one true God forever.”
No Christians do not get this from the Bible, as the Bible gives no details at to the nature of angels.
You said: “It’s still racism and thus unethical.”
You scientific ideas, though common, are unproven and unprovable. I really don’t care what you think, but you have no more proof for what you say than we do.
Also, it is only unethical if it is false. It is only racism if the skin color is the determining factor. As you cannot prove it false you cannot prove it unethical. As the skin color is not the determining factor it is not racist.
You said: “All of whom are white, is that correct?”
No one can really answer this, but I highly doubt it. I do believe that some were born in other races. Examples that I would use as possible valient people who were not born white would be Ham’s wife and children; Pharoah (Ham’s grandson); most of the Lamanites as they were also born into the House of Israel and thus were not barred from the Priesthood; and I think many others.
It is always dangerous to assume anything is universal in scope.
You said: “Unless there was later intermarriage between the tribes of Judah and Ephraim.”
There would have been very little intermarriage actually. Such was forbidden in the Law of Moses and the Jews at the time of Jesus were very strict concerning that Law. It is possible that some intermarriage happened, but it would have been slight.
Anyway, Joseph Smith is most likely descended from the people of the Lost Tribes who escaped north. This happened many years before, Again making the likelihood of such descent nearly impossible.
Beyond this is the simple fact that Joseph Smith never claimed descent from Jesus as the video says. He claimed descent from Joseph, but never from Christ.
You said: “there is no evidence that Jesus ever married or had children. Otherwise, that would have been mentioned in the Gospels.”
I never said there was evidence, and I specifically said that all this is speculation, as the truth on the matter has not been revealed. Thus the video is wrong to say that this is what the LDS church teaches, which is what I was saying.
Anyway, just because there is no evidence does not mean that he wasn’t married. It also does not logically follow that his marriage or possible children would be recorded in the gospels. It is just as logical to say that the Apostles feared the jews would try and kill his children if they knew were they were, and so they were left out of the record for their protection.
In fact, I have read the argument that Isaiah 53: 8 is a prophecy of just such happening.
“He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.”
No one will declare his generation (or his children) for he was killed for the world.
Shemawater,
As an example, you cited Psamls 82:6. Read on to the next verse which says “But you will die like men. And fall like the one of the princess.” (Psalms 82:7) — The Bible itself says God doesn’t die.. SO this is obviously not what is meant.
This has nothing to do with the conversation. But since we are at it, what scientific ideas are you talking about?
Like how Mormons believe that decendents of the Biblical Joseph inhabited North America? Even if it happened many years ago, it should still be traceable in the genes of Joseph Smith’s decendents… It’s not as if semetic ancestory cannot be traced, even so long ago. The Y chromosome would preserve some hints. — It certainly worked for the Lemba people who have actually been able to demonstrate a relationship to the Jews despite 2,700 years of separation.
— Oh, a more detailed discussion of the “Ye are gods” comments is found here:
http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/yegods.htm
Shematwater, I am no more inclined to accept Joseph Smith as a Prophet than I am to accept Muhammad as a Prophet. What I do know is that it is impossible for one to accept both as Prophets and therefore one of them must be a fraud. Why? Because the basic creed of Islam, the religion Muhammad founded, is “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” Muslims would consider Mormonism to be blasphemous, since the greatest sin in Islam is to acknowledge the existence of other gods, period! And since Islam was founded first and is far more successful, why shouldn’t I become Muslim and scorn Mormonism? The Muslims claim their religion was the restoration of Abraham’s religion too. They even claim that Arabs descended from his son Ishmael, and that’s FAR more credible than the Mormon claim that the ancient Hebrews gave rise to the Native Americans!
And what about this statement of yours:
Oh, really? Shall we apply that idea to other concepts?
There is a difference between faith, which is believing in something that has not been disproven, and stupidity, which is believing something that has not only been disproven, but is IMPOSSIBLE to be true. I know Krissmith777 to be a man of faith. You, Shematwater, are a man of profound STUPIDITY!
Dale Husband
You’re right… It so happens I am taking a class for native american history now. The claim that they are decendents of the Isrealites is absolutely ridiculous.
To say that the Book of Mormon is simply talking about a small group of people (as some Mormon apologists do) contradicts Josepth Smith as well as the Book of Mormon which actually says point blank that all the land from the north sea, the south sea, the west sea and the eastern sea were all inhabited by them. —
Not only does DNA falsify that claim, but it is also falsified by simple logic: The very fact that the native americans had no immunity to old world diseases like smallpox itself proves they were isolated from the old world for many thousands of years. Had they appeared in the 6th century BC had as the Book of Mormon had said, they would have had that built up immunity to old world diseases since smallpox existed in the eastern hemosphere at that time….. And even IF the BOK is talking about a small group….that diease would had spread through the Americas long before the so called “discovery” of America.
—to back up my last point, Smallpox is thought to have appeared in the eastern hemohphere at about 10,000 BC. — If Native American origins had their origins from the early 6th century BC, then they would have already had an immunity.
(Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1200696/ )
DALE
I don’t care what you except. The blog was on the validity of the video, which I said was full of errors and you asked what was in error, so I explained it. Whether you except the LDS faith as true or false is not the issue that was being discussed. The issue that was being discussed was the accuracy of the video. It is not accurate, as it claims the LDS teach and believe things that they do not.
(Dale Husband: That’s ACCEPT, not except. Get a dictionary! Yes, we started with the video, but your confirmation of certain claims in the video, such as the Native Americans somehow being descended from ancient Hebrews, and God having been a man and us being able to become gods, is offensive enough.)
As to your rather pathetic logic you use with what I said concerning the nature of God and god, let us examine it.
What you say about presidents can be perfectly truth, depending on the organization. In the LDS church there are three men who are called president, but there is only one President of the Church. However, in the United States there is only man who is called president.
As to your other three examples, they make absolutle no sense. Planets, livers, and houses are objects. However, I will concede that it is possible to give a planet the name “Planet” and thus make this idea work. It is also possible to do the same with livers and houses. An example is The White House. Yes, it can work. However, it is not true as of now.
Going back to God vs god: What I say is much more logical than your attempts at comparrison. The Bible capitalizes the word God only when speaking of the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost. A word that is capitalized in the English Language is a proper now. As such to say that this use is a title (which makes it proper) is perfectly reasonable. Also, to say that the use of god uncapitalized refers not to a title but to a state of being is perfectly reasonable, as such would not be a proper now. In this way, when Paul writes “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father” (1 Cor. 8: 5-6) he is saying there are many who exist in the state of godhood, but there is only one who holds the title of God.
(Dale Husband: What about the Muslim claim that “There is no god but Allah.”? Care to address that, or will you keep ducking it? People usually say “God” because to them there is only ONE god, otherwise, we would have to use other names for God. Of course, there are many names for God or Allah, but they are not really necessary. When we say “God” everyone generally understands that we mean the Biblical god and no other. The others do not exist.)
Now, as to things being unproven or disproved, I have yet to see it. You can call me stupid all you want, it means nothing. There is nothing disproving the LDS faith. All that anyone has is the argument that there is a lack of proof for it.
(Dale Husband: When there is no proof for something, why should anyone believe it? Even some of the stories in the Bible are more credible because they are based on actual history, including the rise and fall of the Assyrian, Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and Roman Empires. There is NO record anywhere of “Nephites” and “Lamanites” aside from the Book of Mormon. Incidentally, if it is true that all churches prior to the time of Joseph Smith were preaching abominations, and if the God-fearing Nephites were destroyed by the unfaithful Lamanites, that makes God the Father and his Son Jesus very weak indeed. Why believe in a God that cannot maintain a true following?)
Krissmith777
The science I was talking about is the explanation that the sun made people black.
(Dale Husband: No, I did not say the Sun made people black. I said that over time mutations arose that turned people’s skin dark with a pigment that protected the skin’s genetic material from solar radiation. Oh, but you don’t believe in evolution, do you? So you wouldn’t understand the concept of mutations.)
As to Psalms 82: 6, please read the verse that I give in John right after I list this one. Jesus is using Psalms 82: 6 to prove he can be the son of the Father.
John 10: 34-36 “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are agods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”
His reasoning is “Why complain that I claim to be the son of God when the psalmist, in scripture, says you are all gods?”
Now, I do not think that in either case it is meant that they were fully gods. It is speaking to the devine potential of man. He called them gods because they are of the same race as God and able to become gods. As some have put it, we are all gods in embrio. Just as many people refer to the embrio or fetus as a person, even though it has not yet developed, even so do the scriptures refer to us as gods (in these two verses) because we can become so, even though we are not fully developed.
(Dale Husband: A more logical interpretation of that passage is that kings, priests, and prophets could have godlike powers over their people because of their association with the Word of God as defined at that time.)
As to finding Israelite blood in the American Indians, I am not really surprised, and it really changes nothing. The Lamanites were cursed with dark skin, which would require an altering of the genetic code within their bodies. As such traces of such descent could easily be lost to modern science. It would not be lost to God however.
Oh, and I never really liked the “small group” idea myslef. I think it does work for the first half of the Book of Mormon, but fails after the wars in Alma and the spreading of the people over the land.
(Dale Husband: Dark skin is only one trait among thousands that are passed down over thousands of years. Even with those changes, one should still be able to determine which races are most closely related to each other. We can look at mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down the female lines and has nothing to do with skin color. We can also look at Y chromosome DNA which is passed down the male lines. Dogs also have wide variations in fur color, body size and shape, and other features, yet we can link all dog breeds to the gray wolf through examination of their genes. In order to support your assumption, God would have had to alter hundreds or thousands of genetic sequences in the Lamanites, and to do so in a way to show they were most closely related to Mongoloids instead. OOPS!)
(By the way, if you are going to believe the Bible than it has only been 6000 years since the fall, and so 10,000 BC cannot exist.)
(Dale Husband: So you are one of those Young Earth Creationists who takes the Genesis creation myths literally? What makes your myths better than those of other ancient mythologies that exist? It is a damned irony that if your Book of Mormon is proven false, it also casts doubt on the accuracy and validity of the Biblical stories. It would have been better for Christians if something as rediculous as the Book of Mormon had not been made up! And we are certain it was made up because WE DON’T HAVE ACCESS TO THE GOLDEN PLATES JOSEPH SMITH SUPPOSEDLY TRANSLATED THE BOOK OF MORMON FROM! Why would he not keep them and have them in the Mormon Church’s possession to this day???)
Shemawater,
Actually, Dale hit the nail on the head when he said “A more logical interpretation of that passage is that kings, priests, and prophets could have godlike powers over their people because of their association with the Word of God as defined at that time.
“ — This is historically accurate.
I really love how Mormon’s are in denial about this. The DNA of American Indians is inconsistent with the genetics we would expect to find if there was EVEN A SMALL GROUP of Isrealites in North America.
This would not be lost to the DNA. It would still be detectable in the Y Chromosome for various reasons:
1. The Y Chromosome is passed from father to son.
2. Lehi (the Isrealite) is the father of the Lamanites.
3. The intro to the BOK says the Lamanites are the “principal ancestors to the American Indians.”
4. Therefore a semetic Y chromosome should be a “principal” genetic component in their genetic makeup.
This would NOT change!!!!There is no way around this. Even some honest Mormon anthropologists have come out and admitted the evidence is against the Book of Mormon.
Uh, let me clear up my position on this:
I do not believe that the Bible is inerrant. It has errors and contradictions. — However, I do personally believe it to be divinely inspired, and that it is a useful guid for Christians. Divine inspiration is NOT the same as perfection. Even if a perfect God inspired human writers, the human writers would still be imperfect and express God in an imperfect way. And besides, the Bible doesn’t say the earth is 6,000 years old, so even if I believed that the Bible were inerrant, this would make no difference.
Shemawater,
Another thing:
You just took this verse out of context. All you have to do is look at the verse that comes before to realize this: 4So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.” (1 Corinthians 8:4)
“No God but one.” That completely blows what you say out of the water…. In the context, what the passage is REALLY SAYING is that the “lords many and gods many” are really false gods…. You have no case.
(Dale Husband: And with that, I declare this debate OVER with my judgement in favor of krissmith 777 and against Shemawater. No further posts from the latter will be approved after today!)
However, I WILL post under my name what shematwater just said to me, since I find it so amusing and ironic:
And to blow away shematwater’s claim that I am merely a bigot who thinks he is smarter than anyone else:
https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/an-honorable-skeptic/
https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/uus-need-to-stop-being-anti-christian/
The only reason shematwater calls me an “angry, hateful person who seems to find anyone who disagrees with [him] to be stupid” is because I rejected and scorned HIS chosen dogmas, after finding them to be totally without logical or empirical merit. That is the typical tactic of someone who is himself blinded by his own bigotry and narrow-mindedness. I am amazed that he can say that I am bigoted when his own Book of Mormon contains some of the most vile racist statements ever made, as shown here:
https://dalehusband.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/the-book-of-mormon-is-a-p-o-s/
Anyone who thinks racism is evil must also think the Book of Mormon is evil, period. If that is intolerance, I plead guilty, because as an Honorable Skeptic, intolerance of all evil is exactly what I aspire to.
Here is a video titled “The God Makers II”, also by Ed Decker, giving more testimonies of the evils of Mormonism:
http://www.archive.org/details/God_Makers
The title above is inaccurate, for it says “God Makers = The Lies of The Mormon Church (1980)”. Watch this anyway.