Is the Church really growing?

[_Drifting]

Referring back to the 'growth' of the Church...

Out of 7.011 billion people on the planet, the Lords One True and fastest growing Church can only attract and keep actively engaged less than 0.1% of them.

Satan's team appears to have the edge...

[_subgenius]

Referring back to the 'growth' of the Church...

Out of 7.011 billion people on the planet, the Lords One True and fastest growing Church can only attract and keep actively engaged less than 0.1% of them.

Satan's team appears to have the edge...

Not really...Satan's team only composes about 4%-%7 of the world pop.....maybe you just are not trying hard enough?

[_Drifting]

Referring back to the 'growth' of the Church...

Out of 7.011 billion people on the planet, the Lords One True and fastest growing Church can only attract and keep actively engaged less than 0.1% of them.

Satan's team appears to have the edge...

Not really...Satan's team only composes about 4%-%7 of the world pop.....maybe you just are not trying hard enough?

Nope, according to Mormonism there is only one true Church, all the rest are an abomination and therefore are...on Satan's team.

[_Shulem]

Nope, according to Mormonism there is only one true Church, all the rest are an abomination and therefore are...on Satan's team.

There are, according to the Book of Mormon, only two churches. One is a giant church that covers the whole world and has many coastlines. The other is a tiny little church with few in numbers. That is the church in which the US government stepped in and ordered them to hault the practice of polygamy or face prosecution. Some of the leaders of this tiny little church went into hiding and refused to obey the laws of the land.

I'm not making this stuff up. Mormonism used to teach that it was a glorious thing for a man to have several wives. The church doesn't teach that anymore because it's embarrassing. The church feels somewhat ashamed of their past and doesn't like to talk about it. It's behind them now.

Paul O

[_Buffalo]

Not really...Satan's team only composes about 4%-%7 of the world pop.....maybe you just are not trying hard enough?

Nope, according to Mormonism there is only one true Church, all the rest are an abomination and therefore are...on Satan's team.

Indeed. As Jesus himself said to Brother Joseph:

"I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all ccorrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."

[_subgenius]

Indeed. As Jesus himself said to Brother Joseph:

"I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all ccorrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."

(emphasis above mine)
Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.
follow the link, read, and understand that Joseph Smith clearly and gramatically details that these three "sects" were subject of the pronouns which are bold-faced above, and that these were the subject of his prayer.

But maybe you have actual support for another subject for those pronouns, which you would care to share....indeed.

[_Buffalo]

Indeed. As Jesus himself said to Brother Joseph:

"I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all ccorrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."

(emphasis above mine)
Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.
follow the link, read, and understand that Joseph Smith clearly and gramatically details that these three "sects" were subject of the pronouns which are bold-faced above, and that these were the subject of his prayer.

But maybe you have actual support for another subject for those pronouns, which you would care to share....indeed.

Incorrect, as usual. Jesus' statement was given in the following context:

18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”

http://www.LDS.org/scriptures/pgp/js-h/1.3?lang=eng#2

[_Themis]

It's the same story with so called science verses the Bible.

With the Bible you are hard pressed to find any who would support a literal view of things like a global flood or young earth, and the few you find are believers first and have obvious bias and agenda's. You can't find any who are not christian and think there is evidence for a young earth or global flood. I wonder why. Now with the Book of Abraham you have no Egyptologists that have said the facsimiles or existing papyri translate into the Book of Abraham narrative Joseph provided. This includes the few LDS ones as well.

Which flavor of scientist do you prefer.

I prefer the real ones that actually have some science to provide. When it comes to the flood or young earth we see no science or processes to support a religious conclusion. What dating processes do they use and why should they be considered accurate?

You imply that the PHD's are ignorant who believe differently than you.

Just very biased with religious conclusions, not scientific ones. Again you can't find any outside of the conservative christian world.

I prefer the same ones that Christ would prefer. He obviously believed in the Old Testament accounts, and being the Creator, he should know, right?

How would you know who the real Jesus was. All accounts come after by those who were not there.

He also warned about men being puffed up in pride because they think they as far as the wisdom of the world is concerned.

The puffed up ones are the ones who incorrectly think they are going with the wisdom of God not realizing the whole time it was just the wisdom of men long dead who had little knowledge of the world around them. I think it wiser not to ignore what man has discovered in more recent times.

[_ludwigm]

...the 'growth' of the Church...

[_gdemetz]

I don't hardly know where to begin . There are just too many false statements for me to have time to deal with. However, there is one that really stands out to me, and that is the one that stated; how do we know who the real Jesus was, and that all the accounts were written after His ministry. Although it may not be proven what the exact date of some of the written accounts of Him were written, we know that they were written by his contemporaries and disciples who lived at the same time that He did and were eye witnesses of His ministry. A good example of this is the Book of John. John was one of His apostles who was with Him during His ministry!