Do you believe there was a 'great apostasy' in the early Church? Click
How can you claim your religion is true considering all the false prophecies
of your 'church' (including those of Joseph Smith)? Remember that Scripture
says, "If you say to yourselves, 'How can we recognize an oracle which the LORD has spoken?', know that, even though a
prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if his oracle is not fulfilled or verified, it is an oracle which the LORD did not speak."
Where did you get the idea that there was to be continuing
revelation? Certainly this does not come from Scripture which
discusses handing on
what was already received (e.g. 1 Cor. 11:23, 1 Cor. 15:3).
How can you maintain that there is a plurality of Gods, when
clear that there is only one God (e.g. Deut. 4:35, Deut. 32:39, 2 Sam.
7:22, Isa. 44:6-8, Jn. 17:3, 1 Tm. 1:17, 1 Tm. 2:5, Jude 1:24-25)?
Why do you require marriage to enter the highest kingdom when St.
Paul and Jesus both recommended celibacy (see Mt. 19:12, 1 Cor.
7:8, 1 Cor. 7:32-38)? Why do you also not
think marriage ends at death, considering what scripture says (see
Mt. 22:30, Mk. 12:25, Lk. 20:34-5, Rom. 7:2-3)?
Why do you believe God the Father has a material body when God is
a spirit (cf. Jn. 4:24, Lk. 24:39)? Are you unaware that Scripture
frequently uses symbolism to convey truth (e.g. God's mighty "arm"
may be used to convey strength - but such terminology doesn't mean
God literally has an arm!)?
How can you dare to claim that God was once 'not God', but
progressed His way up to being God?! Do you not see how this is
contrary to Scripture (e.g. Gen. 21:33, Ps. 90:2, Isa. 40:28, Hab. 1:12,
Tm. 6:16)? How can the eternal God not have been God from all
eternity?! How can Scripture speak of an unchangeable God if God
has changed (e.g. Ps. 102:26-28, Sirach 42:18-22, Isa. 46:4, Mal.
3:6, Jms. 1:16-17)?
How can you honestly believe you are "advancing to
godhood"? Does that not sound like the very same line that
Satan presented to Adam & Eve in Gen. 3:5?
How can you assert that 'tithing' is so important to progressing
to one's "godhead"? Why does Scripture not support these
necessary payments to the 'church' to become a "god'?
How can you claim to have the Aaronic priesthood when this
limited to descendants of Aaron? Why do you even claim to have a
priesthood at all since a priesthood is precisely for offering sacrifice, of
which you have none? Further, why do you claim to hold a
priesthood that was ended by Christ (see Heb. 7:12)?
Why is it that your 'church' has held such negative (and
of persons of color?
Why do you tolerate divorce, in direct contrast to Christ's
teaching (see Mt. 5:32, Mt. 19:9, Mk. 10:7-9, Mk. 10:11-12, Lk.
Why would it be necessary to refrain from alcohol considering that
Scripture doesn't condemn - and, in fact, directly prescribes -
the drinking of alcohol (in moderation, of course)? For example, consider
the following passages of Scripture:
May God give to you of the dew of the heavens And of the fertility of the earth abundance of grain and wine.
104:14-15: You raise grass for the cattle and plants for our beasts of burden.
You bring bread from the earth, and wine to gladden our hearts, Oil to make our faces gleam, food to build our strength.
Prov. 31:6 Give strong drink to one who is perishing, and wine to the sorely
depressed [Note: Consult a competent physician
regarding the appropriate application of this passage in any given
Sirach 31:27: Wine is very life to man if taken in moderation. Does he really live who lacks the wine which was created for his joy?
62:8-9: The LORD has sworn by his right hand and by his mighty arm:
No more will I give your grain as food to your enemies; Nor shall foreigners drink your wine, for which you toiled.
But you who harvest the grain shall eat it, and you shall praise the LORD;
You who gather the grapes shall drink the wine in the courts of my sanctuary.
Joel 2:19: The LORD answered and said to his people: See, I will send you grain, and wine, and oil, and you shall be
filled with them; No more will I make you a reproach among the nations.
Tm. 5:23: Stop drinking only water, but have a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent illnesses.
[Note: Consult a competent physician regarding
the appropriate application of this passage in any given case.]
if alcohol was prohibited, why did Christ miraculously turn
water into wine as his first public miracle (Jn. 2:1-11)? Why did he
institute the Eucharist under the form of bread and wine for his
followers (se Mt. 26:26-29)?
How can anyone think original sin was necessary - in fact, even
think it a positive good? How could it ever be a 'good' to disobey
a command of God?
Why do Mormons engage in so much genealogical work when this is
condemned in Scripture? For example, consider that Scripture
Tm. 1:3-4: I repeat the request I made of you when I was on my way to
Macedonia, that you stay in Ephesus to instruct certain people not to
teach false doctrines or to concern themselves with myths and endless genealogies, which
promote speculations rather than the plan of God that is to be received
3:9: Avoid foolish arguments, genealogies, rivalries, and
quarrels about the law, for they are useless and futile.
do you insist on "proxy baptism" when Scripture never
says one can be baptized for another? [Note that "having
(oneself) baptized for the dead (see 1 Cor. 15:29), does not refer
to "proxy baptism" - a practice unknown before Mormonism
- but may be better said to refer to the hope of being reunited
with Christians who have already died.] As Scripture says,
"it is appointed that human beings die once, and after this
the judgment" (Heb. 9:27). Scripture never speaks of the dead
waiting around waiting for a "proxy baptism". Rather,
as St. Francis de Sales explains, "This passage properly
understood evidently shows that it was the custom of the primitive
Church to watch, pray, fast, for the souls of the departed. For,
firstly, in the Scriptures to be baptized is often taken for
afflictions and penances (e.g. Lk. 12:50, Mk. 10:38-40)".
Clearly, the pouring of baptismal water can only affect the person
it touches - no one - living or dead - can receive graces "by
Why have Mormon writings (supposedly written before the
New Testament) been charged with containing 'plagiarisms' from the New Testament?
How can you take the claim of the "golden plates" seriously when it
can not be authenticated by any unbiased sources? What if someone
claimed to have "golden plates" that denied the Mormon's
golden plates but couldn't produce any unbiased evidence of this -
would you believe them? Since when does God permit something of
such 'importance' to mankind to be hidden without even being independently
Why does archeological evidence not support Mormon claims
concerning ancient settlers in the New World (contrary to Mormon
assertions regarding archeological evidence)?
Why do supposedly ancient Mormon writings reference various items
as existing in the
New World even though they weren't introduced here until later (e.g. elephants)?
Why have various Mormon teachings contradicted themselves over
time (e.g. polygamy)? How are we to imagine that the unchangeable
God has changed?
How can one take a religion seriously when its dogmas are subject
to change over time?
If your religion was true, why is it that you must "hide"
certain tenets of your faith until people are
"prepared" to hear them [e.g. how you claim Christ was
conceived, that you believe in a plurality of gods, that you believe
Christ and Lucifer were brothers(!), that Adam was really
Michael (the archangel), that Christ had to "progress to the
Why is it your religion seems to attempt conversions by appealing
to people's emotions rather than considering theology?
Why do you seem to decide what is true based on your feelings?
Would you also employ such feelings-based judgments when it comes
to other matters involving truth - e.g. Mathematics?
How do you explain the bad actions of your 'founder', Joseph Smith
(e.g. multiple cases of adultery, including with a teenager)?
If great apostasy occurred early in the early Church, how then can
you trust your own bible? Do you not realize that the canon of
Scripture was determined by the Catholic Church just before the
year 400? How can you claim that the Church apostatized on one
hand (despite Christ's promise in Mt. 16:18), and on the other
hand rely on its judgment to determine the bible that you use?