Do mormon's go to heaven too?

[ochotseat]

From my lights The Book Of Mormon is an additional witness to The Monarch Of The Universe GOD THE FATHER, THE LORD OF LIFE CHRIST JESUS, and THE TESTATOR OF ALL TRUTH THE HOLY GHOST. It is a second witness standing together with THE HOLY BIBLE in response to the constant attacks of atheists, humanists, liberal christians and churches with heretical doctrines/teachings/. The Bible and BofM are Brothers in the same cause for truth.
joe smith ?, Joseph Smith JR. [His actual name] was no more a Prophet/Apostle that the O.T/N.T Prophets/Apostles, his calling was to bare Testimony and Witness that GOD lives, Jesus Is the Christ and that they are still alive and well and that they still speak today. In reality People ignore what THE LORD OF LIFE has said in our world both in the past and today and Joseph Smith reminded what was said and that there is more.
In reality The Bible and book of Mormon are used together on the same par. The Book of Mormon is stressed maybe more due to help understanding the Bible and Doctrines. The same could be said of critics of early Biblical/post Biblical Christians, Why do you have a "New Testement"/Propthets and Apostles when we already have the Word of GOD and the Prophets of Old ?.
In LDS Doctrine/Teaching/Thought/Practice Joseph Smith J.R is not more importent than THE LORD OF LIFE CHRIST JESUS, he was the Prophet that was used to restore what was lost. A modern day John The Baptist you might say, just as John the Baptist in the N.T prepared everone for the coming of Jesus the first time, Joseph Smith J.R prepared people for his second coming. Once again I refer you to the web address above to examine/seek out published material to help you in your quest. Thank you, may Grace Rain On You this Day/Night. IN HIS DEBT/GRACe, TANYAN.

Are you a Mormon? I'd like to hear some Mormon voices on this issue.

[Tanyan]

In response to your inquiry, yes I am a Believer/Christian/Disciple/Latter Day Saint/Saint/Mormon. Yes it would be of interest if other LDS posted, not many puruse this forum I take it. I myself just happened to stumble on to this site a few days ago. I admit to not being a Scholar/Theologian/Apologist or having any letters of the alphabet after my name showing any Training/Degrees in the Israelite/Christian sciences, or anything coneected to them. I am as a private in the greatist army. Thanks again for the reply. Grace/Rains, Faith/Works. In His Debt, Grace,Tanyan.

[CountryBoy]

In reality People ignore what THE LORD OF LIFE has said in our world both in the past and today and Joseph Smith reminded what was said and that there is more.

The "and that there is more" part is troublesome . There is no more that what the bible said. It's ALL there

[Felgar]

The "and that there is more" part is troublesome . There is no more that what the bible said. It's ALL there

YUP - good summary.

For me it boils down to these two fundamentally simple possibilities: Either the writings of Joseph Smith are completely synonymous with the entire Bible (in which case Mormons and Christians are one in the same, are both saved, and we can turn to either book for guidance) OR there are contradictions between the Bible and Joseph Smith (in which case Mormonism is blasphemy and is patentently false according to my unshakeable conviction that the Bible is the infallible Word of God).

Given that one of those two possibilities is reality (because they are mutually exclusive), is see no reason to add uncertainty to what I already know to be true!

[Tanyan]

Yes many do find this troublesome just as the Biblical Pharisees and Sadducees found it troublesome that the Biblical Christians would Dare add to the O.T Scriptures. LDS are in Excellent/Great company with the Biblical Christians then. I have read and seen that the Early Christians had some scriptures not found in our current Biblical text. There was no established N.T until approx 367 A.D when Athanasious put together a list of N.T books in his Easter Festus letter, still different Christian communities had scriptures the other did not. Books were "Voted" on as to what was to go in the Biblical canon. We are blessed to have our 66 books of current canon.Thanks for the post, In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan.

[Tanyan]

The Pharisees and Sadducees had the same choices as stated above and chose the same conclusion of no more scripture, once again LDS are in the same Boat as Early Christians by my lights. In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan.

[Felgar]

Yes many do find this troublesome just as the Biblical Pharisees and Sadducees found it troublesome that the Biblical Christians would Dare add to the O.T Scriptures.

Yes, but these changes were validated by the fact that Jesus was the Son of God and that He was crucified and rose from the dead. Further, Jesus was validated by numerous prophets of his time and by the OT scriptures themselves.

There was no established N.T until approx 367 A.D when Athanasious put together a list of N.T books in his Easter Festus letter, still different Christian communities had scriptures the other did not. Books were "Voted" on as to what was to go in the Biblical canon.

That's not entirely true. I suggest you check this out: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... rigin.html

[Kurieuo]

There was no established N.T until approx 367 A.D when Athanasious put together a list of N.T books in his Easter Festus letter, still different Christian communities had scriptures the other did not. Books were "Voted" on as to what was to go in the Biblical canon.

That's not entirely true. I suggest you check this out: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... rigin.html

Actually it is kind of true, but like you say not entirely true. For Tanyan leaves out that the Easter Festus letter by "Athanasius" is evidence that Christians had "already" considered the books as authoritative within the NT canon. There is much support for individual books being accepted as authoritative within the early Christian fathers' writings, even if there was no specifically defined canon. And the books accepted were because of their wide acceptance of Apostolic authority. It's not like any one person or organisation had control of what made it and what didn't. One theologian Morwenna Ludlow summarised the situation in these words:

"With regard to most books it was a question of [the church] explaining why it had what it had, rather than deciding on what it should have. No council sat down to choose the texts according to some pre-established set of criteria, just as a selection committee might decide on the sort of person they want to fill a post, before interviewing the candidates. Rather, there is some sense in which the canon chose (or formed) the Church, rather than the Church chose (or formed) the canon….[W]hat seems to be happening…is that the Church is formulating reason or explanations for why it has what it had, not criteria for choosing what it should have in the future."

(Morwenna Ludlow, "'Criteria of Canonicity' and the Early Church" in John Barton and Michael Wolter (eds), Die Einheit der Schrift and die Vielfalt des Kanons /The Unity of the Scripture and the Diversity of the Canon (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2003), 69-93)

Kurieuo.

[Tanyan]

Thank you for both your points of view, however it still stands that there was no solid codified Scripture Canon for all Christian communities throughout the middle East that was accepted. Even The Grandaddy of the Protestant Reformation Martin Luther did not accept certain Canonical Books of scripture as authoritative, Esther, James, Revelations. I believe that we can say that in Theory the Canon is open, in Practice it is not. Thanks for sharing, may Grace Rain on you this Day, In His Debt Tanyan.

[CountryBoy]

Tanyan,

Could you elaborate a little on the stuff that joe smith added, that wasn't in the Bible?

Thanks,
He has risen indeed (no not joey )

[ochotseat]

Tanyan,

Could you elaborate a little on the stuff that joe smith added, that wasn't in the Bible?

Thanks,
He has risen indeed (no not joey )

Don't Mormons believe that the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox Churches are corrupt? I've noticed that Mormons are now trying to associate themselves more with Christians, which is kind of the opposite of what they used to do. Could this be a sign that Mormons are becoming more Christian (assuming they aren't Christians)?

[Tanyan]

Please remember I am but a Lay member so my obsrevation"s are mine but I can only state/comment of what I believe to be LDS Doctrine/Teaching/Thought/Practice. Joseph Smith J.R [once again not "joe smith"]. As a Disciple of THE LORD OF LIFE who was used by him to translate an anchient Messianic/Christian Text [The Book Of Mormon] into english. He also recieved revelation for mankind to become better Disciples and followers of Christ Jesus.
Latter Day Saints have always considered Christians of other Churches/sects as Christian, and they have always been invited to keep what was true, and come to add to it, if they wished not to join us then keep the truth that they held. Yes LDS have been perhaps more adement to extend a Contend for the faith, Let us Reason Together,Speak the Truth in Love, Walk in The Spirit with our Brothers in other Christian Faiths.
There are a number of publications that address this. It is not a quick read but a commitment to read all of our material of what we believe and responses to our Critics. In fact we have had a number of Apologatic confrences and invite non LDS Christians ti attend, which some have. all LDS are not "Christian", just as all Catholic, Eastern Orthidox, Protestants, Reformed, are "Christians". Well remember this is just my observation. May Grace Rain on you all. Thanks for keeping the posts brief due to my disability and typing with only 2 fingers.

[Tanyan]

I am going to be gone until 9:00 pm C.A time so please no more posts to me until then, and keep it light if you do post, thanks ya,all. May Grace rain on you all, In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Why is it that doctrine can change? Polygomy was backed up by doctrine, until something, some military troops, I can't remember, were sent to Utah to fix everything up with the one man, many women problem, so another angel popped down and changed doctrine....that wasn't from a Mormom (since I started citing Mormom/non-Mormon sources, I'll continue).

Weeee.

[twoedgedsword]

It has been proven beyond a doubt that the indians are not descendants of ancient hebrews DNA tests have been done on all different indian races and proven 100% that they all are of asian decent, so once again the book of mormon has been proven false and joseph smith a liar.

I would also like to respond to tanya about the LDS cult accepting other "christian" doctrines you need to read joe smiths first vision account witch is located in front of your book of mormon it clearly states that God told him not to have anything to do with other churches because they are all corrupt and their creeds are an abomination to him.


The LDS leaders are now teaching that mormons and christians are the same that is a lie from the pit of hell.
1. there is only one book "the Bible"
2. there is only one God, there will never be another not ever!
3. christians believe in the trinity.
4. we never ever believed in polygamy.
and God didn't either!

I know i come across harshly i do not apologize, I'm going to speak the truth to all people and do my best thru the help of Jesus Christ to put and end to mormonism!!!

Joseph smith was nothing more than a con man, a child rapist, a thief,
he is burning in hell with brigham young and all who believe in him is a fool.