Matt Talks About Saying He Would Burn Mormon Books w/ Joe Heschmeyer
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- 📺 Full Episode: • Social Media, Church P...
Last Year Matt said he would burn Mormon books because they contained false Gospels of Christ that Mislead People. Joe Heschmeyer talks about his video series on Mormonism and what his goals were.
🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.loca...
🖥️ Website: pintswithaquin...
🟢 Rumble: rumble.com/c/p...
👕 Merch: shop.pintswith...
🔵 Facebook: / mattfradd
📸 Instagram: / mattfradd
We get a small kick back from affiliate links.
I am not interested in taking a position supporting the beliefs of the LDS faith. However, as a teacher of 38 years who has taught in two Catholic schools as well as public schools, I have found that the LDS children practice their faith much better. Additionally, these kids generally come from better environments and culture, so the fruits of their culture is good in comparison with many others. So, countering their belief system in relation to J. Smith and B. Young is understandable; however, they have some type of hold in family values that is missing with my Catholic students.
The Catholic Church is a much larger tent than Mormonism, though, and you will find great Catholic families in traditional Catholic communities.
Comparing the two is very difficult. In the Catholic faith, you can leave and rejoin. People will be saddened or joyous, and that’s it.
LDS will persecute, harass, and destroy the lives of those who leave. I’d say that family matters more to them, but integrate it through devious means.
LDS is a cult. That tight grip on family is hinged on their beliefs. If someone leaves the mormon church, they may be ostracized by the neighbors and family. Roman Catholics don't do that now, thank God. How can we compare the 2?
Heresies that distort Christ's teaching should not be tolerated. Mormonism is a cult.
@@zanphiel_kingComplete lie
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints I would say a few reasons that we shy away from debate are:
1. We are not raised in a culture of teaching/learning apologetics. So although we may have a deep testimony of our faith we might not have the ability to academically defend it well.
2. Unlike many Christian churches we also don't teach/learn about other faiths much at all. So the differences in our faith aren't as clear to us as others who have had a focused education on it.
3. We tend to avoid contention. Because most debates (man-on-the-street type) don't come from a good-faith basis, they don't seem worth it.
4. As mentioned, we truly feel that the Holy Ghost is the testifier of truth. As much as someone can expertly explain the teachings of our church, we still believe that a person will come closer to Christ and the truth through scripture study and prayer. If someone is convinced from the words we say it's less about our scholarship and skill and more about the workings of the Spirit in their heart.
5. We believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. Though we believe that we have the fulness of the gospel and that this is His true church, we don't see other faiths as "false". We recognize the true parts of their beliefs and how similar other faiths are to us. As such we usually embrace the truths that they hold and want to build upon them, not tear them down.
All this coming from someone who loves discussing my faith with those who have an honest curiosity, but doesn't debate others who are ready to attack or disparage.
All of those points , point to an insular emotional cult not a true faith.
I'm saying this as an ex mormon whos now an orthodox Christian.
I'd be willing to have a chat via zoom or discord etc about the topic if it would help.
As your only reply is disparaging.
I'd argue that in the case of freedom, as a Latter-Day Saint, having those books available is the best. I believe the Holy Ghost would direct us to the truth. So if I saw a Quran in the neighborhood library, I'd leave it. If my kid chose to read it, I'd allow them, as I was allowed to read it and see the problems.
Is this in good faith tho? How about a book blaspheming your religion?
This one guy is such a religious bigot lol
This is factually false and disappointing you would claim especially since we face volunteered multiple times to fly you out or fly out to you multiple times to discuss anything. We have corresponded on twitter and you declined our invitation. On what basis do you claim “Mormons won’t debate?”
AYYYY IT'S THE BOYS. love you guys.
Matt Fradd was cool till he and his guests started misrepresenting LDS history and doctrine.
Thanks for standing up for the faith.
I'd argue that as a former LDS missionary I'm skeptical of debate because every time I ever faced it on my mission it was done with cruelty and in bad faith. We'd be ambushed, lulled into conversation to then be caught off guard. We're very skeptical of the whole Christian world saying they want to have a friendly debate because then they'll pull false claims about us that we have to go through and correct, and then more inaccuracies which we can correct with backed up data. You being bored reading this, yeah that's how it feels. It gets old fast.
As an ex mormon now orthodox Christian who's family are still heavily involved in the church.
I'd be happy to have a discussion on discord or zoom if you'd like
Book of Mormon may not be sacred to you but it is sacred to other people and we should respect that.
Wait, aren't you hosting a debate with Trent against a Mormon in August?
I've also reached out to Joe proposing a dialogue, I'd be happy to do that still.
Is hansonjacob1986 your brother? Seems like you both have very similar questions.
@@zanphiel_king no, but we are friends and worked together to plan the debate with Trent
Matt is referring to a different Mormon apologist, specifically one who is a TH-camr, who abruptly backed out last year.
@@jeremias-serus Yeah I know, Boylan. I've spoken to him about it. But a single anecdote is a pretty small data set for the claim.
@@lukehanson_ it wasn't the first instance of that happening. Anyway, looking forward to seeing an actual debate between these two sides if no one backs out in the next four months.
This conversation is why they say power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Taking the opportunity to destroy a book you don't like is incredibly corrupt and wicked.
It's my understanding that the Taliban and similar groups destroyed monuments and other symbols of other faiths. Burning the LDS scriptures, seems to put us in a similar camp as the Taliban, which is a good enough reason not to do it.
The Taliban also fosters traditional families, supports traditional marriages, and modesty. Guess we shouldn't do those either, huh? Hitler drank water. You wanna be like Hitler??? Such fallacious reasoning.
@@johnathannelson9610 Your response is nonsense. It completely and likely intentionally mischaracterizes the point I was making. Destroying religion artifacts is wrong, regardless of who is doing it. I used the Taliban to make my point and suggest that Matt was on the wrong side of the issue.
It's extremely different. The Taliban destroyed for the sake of destroying what to them were falsehoods.
No one is advocating for burning all falsehoods. Here we're talking about avoiding people getting harmed. Keep your books if you want, but if a previous guest leaves a Book of Mormon or Quran in my hotel room, that one goes home with me and will be discarded.
That book was meant to lead people into harmful error. I wouldn't discard a historical relic or a monument, that's ludicrous and probably highly sinful. But a book printed last year, preaching severe heresy that can potentially damn?
There's ZERO comparison.
@@crusaderACR Which is the same justification that is argued by others. It relies on the assertion that WE Christians are right and they, the Taliban, are wrong. If the rightness of the action depends only on the belief that they are defending the truth, then it seems like everything is fair game. That's the danger.
@@jeffreyportis9388 It seems I didn't get my point across properly. I'll try to rephrase it better this time.
In short: There's a wide difference in kind, even when not in manner.
In longer, I'll do it by illustration.
Have you heard of Iconoclasm? That was an early heresy that saw any image or statue or depiction of divine things as a breach of the 2nd commandment. Some Protestants today have similar tendencies, but that's beside the point.
That group took over the Byzantine Empire a short time. The reaction from the Christian world was fierce and absolutely denounced it. But the mood of the refutations and debates wasn't that there was a line that was crossed, but that they were making up a whole different idea.
A statue of Aphrodite hurts no one. A statue of David, of the Virgin, of Jupiter, of Caesar, there's zero ill there. If there were statues of Buddha in Europe, they'd be left alone.
That didn't mean, however, that the free transit of some information wouldn't be seen as bad. Because it was information. Something like the Book of Mormon wouldn't be burned I think, but a Phoenician book on human sacrifice would be tried to be taken out of public circulation. The Church kept copies of Gnostic books (of the kind that taught that the World was made by Satan, and the true God is locked in Hell) in select libraries and the rest would be disposed of.
See what I mean? The real life examples I gave were more about books leading common folk towards committing atrocities, I admit that. But, here there's actually a connection and a extreme. Destroying a statue of Buddha is as connected to it as the CIA destroying confidential documents; destruction is its only link.
A book that leads people to error is MUCH MUCH more harmless, but it can be in due consideration whether I should allow my kids to read such a thing. Donating it to a library is unthinkable. But a gifted copy, left by a former hotel guest? Disposal it is.
Is this clearer?
The titles of Matt’s 10 min videos have been bad lately. This one is clearly false. Feels more click baity than usual. The Divine Mercy title was terrible too.
Really I thought this one was correct. He clarified an earlier statement that wasn’t clear where he said basically the title
I disagree with your assumption that Latter-day Saints would want to trash books we found heretical. The 11th article of faith says “We claim the privilege of worshiping the almighty God, according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege; let the worship how, where, or what they may.” Agency is central to our doctrine. We do not believe in forcing others to do good by limiting alternative ideas.
One side note, I appreciate that you are both a lot more respectful and logical than a lot of other critics out there, but your insinuations that we run away from debates because our doctrines cannot stand up to scrutiny or logic and they would just crumble if exposed to your logic I find to be pretty arrogant. You don’t truly understand the depth and richness of our doctrines that provides more sound answers that has befuddled traditional Christendom since the apostasy. The idea that these profound truths were just thunk up by a 19th century farm boy are laughable. If a Latter-day Saint is avoiding a debate it is because we do not believe in contention and debates are often contentious and not productive.
Ive debated Mormon missionaries and regular individuals before. Every time they end the conversation on “pray to the Holy Spirit and he will convince you that Joseph Smith was telling the truth.” They never had any substantive point to end on that proved in the context of revelation and religion that I should believe in their particular church. It was always feelings based. I would say to them that every church could tell me to pray and be convinced through feelings that they are correct. In the midst of all that what truth claim can they tell me that sets them apart from other religions which is substantive? How do I know they’re not just another revivalist sect/cult that appeared in the US during the mid to late 1800s (which of course they are)? Catholicism has the pedigree of authority and line of succession to Peter. It’s doctrines and dogmas can easily be sources and evidenced by both primary and secondary sources of historical and biblical literature. There’s multitudes of examples of Catholicism battling various heresies and dictating the course of Christian belief and history for centuries. Mormonism on the other hand is totally predicated upon the delusional visions of a single man who got lost in the woods and had a history of fantasizing about discovering long lost truths among long lost treasures. Treasure hunting was a huge meme and pastime in those days a d he built a whole religion around the concept and swept up countless people within the fervor of that narrative.
But every church Doesn't tell you to pray about it's truthfulness. Doesn't an inner witness from God mean anything? But if you want evidence, here's a source. m.th-cam.com/play/PLify9A8x-4Qqjk2PusTaLtVvO4B-pH3Lc.html
That would be a skeptics interpretation of the events. However as you are probably aware atheists make many similar arguments to the one you’re making about Catholicism and Christianity in general. Finally, as a Christian you should have no issue with deference to the spirit of God being the source of truth, as that is what Christ taught his disciples before his death in the gospel of John.
@@benjaminvandenberghe9726
Christ did make similar claims, but Christ’s miracles, resurrection and ascension are corroborated by witnesses. His coming and life events correspond with the prophets of old not even mentioning the typological proofs of Christ from the Scripture.
The entire Mormon religion hinges upon the private visions of Smith that he alone had seen. In a mon-religious context it’s not wholly dissimilar to any other religious claim, but within the context of Christianity, it’s incredibly dubious.
@@aVo_001 Joseph Smith had more than 8 witnesses that attested to seeing angels, the gold plates, etc., and never renounced their testimony.
The problem with "debating" LDS missionaries is that they are 18-20 year olds with little to no formal theology training, and no debate training. A debate with an LDS seminary teacher or religion professor would be worth thinking about, but I've encountered far too many LDS missionaries to be impressed by anyone that debates with them. I can win a race against my infant niece, but is it really a victory?
Destroying a book with which you disagree that you find in a little library is not a proper response. That book was donated to that library for the purpose of someone taking possession of it, not to destroy it. How is it any different than taking the free pamphlets from the table or rack at the back of any church with the purpose to destroy them? I think you both need to rethink your stance on this. If I'm missing something, please, point it out to me. Thanks, in advance.
Amen
"a book with which you disagree"
It's not a matter of disagreeing. A common modern misconception is that Christianity is something like another school of philosophy or private opinion. That may be true of Marxism and Buddhism, but this one is not.
To be convinced of the Christian claims means that you believe that this is an objective truth, connected to historical facts regarding Christ and often personally witnessed evidence of the supernatural corroborating this.
To put it in a secular comparison, imagine you come across a quite persuasive book alleging that the world is in fact freezing and we should burn as much carbon as possible. The spread of such an idea could bring disastrous consequences. You'd probably want that out of public schools and libraries.
The consequences here, however, are eternal. It's worse than global warming and flat earth conspiracies.
People in error have rights and their property shouldn't be taken and burned. This is extremely important and not in doubt.
But harmful error has no rights. The book may have historical value, you may perfectly keep copies yourself in order to rationally debunk the error, but there can be cases where the book is in a place that can mislead gullible people.
The reason burning is specifically mentioned is that the Bible does talk of book burning, done so for symbolic purposes, though of privately owned books from new converts.
"Many of those who had become believers came forward and openly acknowledged their former practices. Moreover, a large number of those who had practiced magic collected their books and burned them in public. They calculated their value and found it to be fifty thousand silver pieces. Thus did the word of the Lord continue to spread with influence and power." - Acts 19:18-20
@@crusaderACR wrote, "People in error have rights and their property shouldn't be taken and burned. This is extremely important and not in doubt." This is precisely the situation being discussed. Those little libraries are not there for one to cull the contents of material of which one does not approve.
@@mikesarno7973 I wouldn't dispose that book in a library. But I would cull material, if I had the ability. I may certainly dispose a Book of Mormon (or a Quran) left in my hotel room though.
If there are any Christians that find Mormonism to be a falsehood so dangerous that it may warrant doing that in libraries (such things do exist), then maybe they know something I don't. Maybe I'll let you know after I dig deeper.
The idea of keeping books out of public libraries is probably inconceivable to Americans, but I have no such qualms. I'd want Communist books and "drag queen story hour" out of there as well.
The issue here is not so much that it's a book that we disagree with. But it's a book that contains serious errors. This is the issue with modern interpretations of religious liberty. Man is not free to seek whichever religion suits his fancy or to embrace any religious or spiritual ideas that suit his interests. Man has a natural right/duty to seek the truth. The whole truth.
The Book of Mormon teaches that the spirit of contention is of the devil. Arguing for the sake of arguing. However, a discussion had to try and teach and edify is of the Lord. So, we avoid debates where the other side clearly has no intention of listening. I would argue Jesus teaches us this by example, when he is brought before Herod he doesn't try and argue his position in front of someone who obviously doesn't care, but keeps silent. In contrast, Pilate had a sincere desire to understand who Jesus was, so Jesus engaged in a discussion with him. We're not afraid of debate, but we don't argue just for the sake of arguing because it will benefit no one, and is of the devil.
As a member of the LDS faith. I have not destroyed any book I didn’t own. And never went out of my way to destroy books offered free in public. I respect anyone’s right to investigate and read anything they want to read free or bought. I have like 5 different bibles and many different religious books in my house. The LDS understanding is if it is of good report aka many people see value in the text we should read it. The LDS position provides more grace to all religions, than the position Matt and guest provide different religious denominations.
Cool story culty guy
I'm not a Mormon, but I agree with you entirely. For what it's worth, I don't know any Catholic that would dream of burning a religious text that held significance to anyone else. This just makes Matt look like a weird fundamentalist.
@@georgerafa5041 it’s alright. Anyone by the standards people determine cults can be said to be part of a cult. Everyone! But I don’t go around telling people they belong to a cult. I’m a little bit more respectful. But it’s just proves how people treat lds people. Poorly.
@@alepine1986to be honest, it relies on the text
@@alepine1986and they’re weak Catholics for that.
Have we not learned by now that book burning or anything like unto it is not productive and actually harmful. Think of how much knowledge we lost when those good Christians burned those ancient Mayan and other early American books. Would it not been better for them to preserve them so that we could learn about those people? Would it be ok for a Muslim to burn Bibles and Catholic books because they disagree with them? Book burning and related activities show little courage and really show one is fairly childish in how they view the world. As an LDS person, if someone burns the Book of Mormon, fine. We can print more copies. However I will not burn catholic books simply because its immature. It shows one is intellectually weak.
I’m Catholic and agree. That was a stupid thing for him to say. Total lack of charity in that moment.
Muslims murder Christian’s on the regular dude I don’t think they’re thinking twice about destroying bibles
100%. 395 the emperor Theodosius and Cyril of Alexandria. Extinguished millennia of wisdom, literature, theater, theology, philosophy and everything in between. For shame.
Doesn’t it depend on what the book is and who is likely to be harmed by it? I mean, if someone gave you a satanic Bible would you keep it on your shelf or give it away to someone else? I wouldn’t. Nor would I be happy to let pornographic books be in my child’s school library…sadly common today.
I have no hesitation burning an indecent book if my kids were going to be exposed by it and it didn’t involve stealing or destruction of someone else’s property. Eg. I’ve purchased a book of spells from an op shop specifically to destroy it to stop others being misled by it, because I believe it’s a potential opening to diabolical influence. But if it was in the hands of someone specifically educated in that area and they needed to analyse it for the right purposes, eg to refute it or educate others in being on their guard that’s another thing. I think context / circumstance is important.
@@MattCellaneous Weird. How was it there when Caliph Omar showed up in 640?
Would Matt think it is acceptable for a Mormon to take the Catechism from a library and burn it?
False equivalency. Mormonism is false, Catholicism is true.
But I'd totally understand why a Mormon would burn the Catechism.
@@crusaderACR Read the question, nobody said anything about what is true or false. If a Mormon or any other person is removing the CCC from a library, would Matt find this acceptable?
@@bhcatanach I don't live with Matt, unfortunately.
@@bhcatanach Of course not. But those who are right have more rights than those who are wrong. Do you understand that?
@@PaulDo22 Are you an American? Are you aware that we have rights stipulated in our Constitution, not for some but for all Americans? You understand that right?
Wait, I have a debate scheduled with Trent Horn on your channel for August? I hope that is not getting canceled.
You are suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect and will get DEMOLISHED.
If this is Jacob Hansen of “ thoughtful faith “ I freakin love your channel. I never miss an episode and your faithful, Christ centered content has been a tremendous gift to me.
Clearly Matt didn't get the memo. His bigotry is still on clear display.
Is this actually Jacob? If so I can't wait to see the debate :)
I am so pumped for that debate. Good luck!
1:49 my dad is a Jehovah’s Witness. He and I constantly clash on it. I’m a Protestant Christian interested in Catholicism, though I still have questions; I even spoke with Patrick Madrid on Relevant Radio. Anyway, how should I respond to my dad? He thinks I’m going to hell and I think he is following false history. I’m 28 years old, but he talks to me like I’m a child.
On another note, as an American, I am wary of censoring books. However, I also recognize that not everything is necessarily appropriate for everybody. I think the JWs and the LDS are incorrect, but I’m not sure if I’d go so far as to burn their books, but I certainly wouldn’t include them in my personal library. As far as what kids should be exposed to though, I definitely think we should be reading material before we ever give it to a kid. When children are very young it’s okay to be an enlightened despot to an extent. Of course, they will eventually reach adolescence and start to decide for themselves, but young kids should definitely be shepherded more closely and with their best interest in mind.
Hey there! I wouldn't know what to say specifically as i know very little about JW theology. Is there a particular argument that you're having trouble with?
As far as how to approach it in the end just hang tough, and love your dad. Sometimes reasonable argument can be helpful but other times you just have to accept debating won't be helpful and just pray for them.
I am of a Catholic background so these are all Catholic sources but if you want resources to help in debate or discussion there's a Catholic text called The Catholic Answer to the Jehova's Witnesses by Louise D'Angelo that friends have told me was helpful for them, I think Jason Evert has written a book too, and of course there's info on Catholic Answers. As far as Christian/Protestant theology on such I'm sure there's resources out there but I'm unfamiliar. Hope that helps, God Bless you!
Shameless Popery on YT probably has some stuff and the Catholic Answers website definitely has a ton of information.
As far as these other books go, I'm not going to treat books that are written on behalf of demons leading people astray or calling for my death with respect. Someone gave me a book of Mormon as I was getting in my car and I had a coughing fit on my ride back to my house. I opened the door and put it on the ground and immediately felt better. I returned it as soon as I could.
@@SealedHeartArt I would say the crux of JW theology is the belief that Jesus is not God, but instead the first created Creature made by God. They believe that Jesus is the Angel Michael in a human form, and that he is subservient to God. They also believe that the Catholic Church was created by Satan to mislead people to damnation.
I'm a former JW who became Catholic. I would recommend checking out the many interviews of former JWs on the Catholic Truth TH-cam channel.
Joe seems like a good man. I feel like he was pressured into a lot of the responses that Matt wanted him to give. Matt seems a lot more hostile to the LDS faith too. Not sure if something’s been bugging him or not about it. But putting aside the disgusting fact of ever burning a religious book which is horribly wrong, I recently received a Quran from a local mosque, they presented it to me with so much respect and love. I will never burn their book or even throw it away because I understand the love and respect they hold for it. I understand Matt does not agree with the Book of Mormon but such a claim is very wrong. To all my LDS friends I apologize in behalf of Matt.
Well said, thanks for the respectful comment 🎉
I was thinking the same thing, Matt wanted Joe to agree with him on the extent of burning books so badly but couldn’t get it.
"Through thy precepts I gain understanding, therefore I HATE every false way."
@@johnathannelson9610 why didn’t Jesus burn Jewish scrolls and scripture? Humble yourself
These books are evil and lead people to hell.
The statement by the youtuber he would burn a text whose truth claims he disagrees with makes him an enemy of the Western Tradition and opposed to freedom of thought. It is completely disqualifying.
Could we get someone talk about the scapular, its promises, the different versions and how to go about attaining said promises i.e. daily little office prayers etc... Thank you so very much for what you do. Your talks have changed my mind and who I am as a Catholic. God bless you and never stop! We need men like you to stand in the void with.
Would you burn the Quran? It denies Jesus divinity.
No I wouldn’t.
Absolutely
Yes
@@drjanitor3747he was hoping it was the kiss of death?
@@drjanitor3747 He kissed it because it showed peace and gratitude. The person who gave it to him gave it as a gift and he kissed it because it was so.
1 Corinthians 9:20-21 - And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: 21 To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were without the law, as if I were without the law, (whereas I was not without the law of God, but was in the law of Christ,) that I might gain them that were without the law.
Ward Radio and Thoughtful Faith are just two Latter day saint channels off the top of my head who will gladly talk/debate with you.
Hope you guys reach out to them and make it happen.
They aren’t really accepting debates right now. Andrew Wilson tired setting up a debate with both and apparently it’s hard to want to get them to debate
Ward Radio engages in SUPER bad faith arguments. Just look at how they attempted to smear Pastor Jeff Durbin and Pastor Mike Winger. Mike Winger said "Mormons believe X". Ward Radio responded and said "we don't believe X why would you say that, this is the 'Evangelical lie'!'". Jeff Durbin responded with evidence that "Yes, Mormons believe X. Here's your own teachers sharing this." Ward Radio responded with "Ok yes we do believe X, but it's so much more beautiful than how you're saying it, also insert ad hominem attack against Jeff Durbin".
Anyone who cares about the truth should avoid interacting with Ward Radio.
@@daniallemmon5453there is one literally scheduled in august 😂
@daniallemmon5453 Andrew Wilson is a very unserious and insincere debater, so that doesn't surprise me at all. Jacob Hansen of Thoughtful Faith is supposed to be debating Trent Horn soon, though
@@dillon7748 not true but okay
I don't understand why you have to destroy it? Do you go around destroying everything you disagree with? Trust the individual. The truth will out!
“As long as you do it behind their back it’s fine.” - Matt Fradd
okay, but how do you feel when people do the same with the Bible? This is a bad argument and a poor approach because then it justifies them, doing the same thing to our sacred items into our sacred books, as they hold our books as nonsense and misleading.
Spot on
@@rangefinderz5135 Protestants destroy statues of Mary, and tear out pages of the Apocrypha. We are lucky there are not an army of Mormons doing the same. Imagine if LDS missionaries made it their mission to buy and then burn all catholic books from public book stores. The reformation was not that long ago and book burnings still happen today.
@@rangefinderz5135The Book of Mormon testifies of Christ from cover to cover. It is scripture. Did you read it?
@@rangefinderz5135 If you haven't read it, you are in no position to comment or have an opinion about it. I'm astonished at how many supposed Christians bear false witness against the Latter-day Saints without having ever opened the book.
You’re hosting a scheduled debate with Trent Horn (Catholic) and Jacob Hanson (Mormon)…maybe you forgot.
I like the visual comment about Nag Hammadi at about 6:07, very helpful
Burning sacred things of other people's religions would be against our religion.“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
Which is against the Bible, like all LDS theology, since the Bible says "Through thy precepts I gain understanding therefore I hate every false way."
@@johnathannelson9610 you are right. It is biblical to destroy the brazen serpent (a clear symbol of Christ) and remove it from the temple. If that never happened maybe more Jews would have understood who Jesus was.
I'm confused; how can the same mind claim that burning books you disagree with is good, but criticizing the group of people to whom the book belongs for not wanting to debate with said book burner is bad? Debate by definition is a free and open exchange of ideas. Iconoclasm stands in opposition to the very spirit of debate. It's a very curious world view.
Right?! I'm appalled by the contempt he is showing here for fellow bwlivers in Christ (or even any human being) that doesn't beleive exactly the same thing as him.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
@@bubbles581Mormons are not ‘fellow’ believers in Christ. The Mormon religion is not Christianity.
@@christianwright8969 and that gives one the right to treat them as unworthy of respect?
@rangefinderz5135 many others feel the same way about Catholic doctrine. Is it right for them to burn it to keep it away?
*Error has no rights*, but erroneous people do have rights is the best and most succinct way of putting the Churches views on human rights.
Why not have a round table discussion instead of a debate? I could suggest a few people...
Did this guy just say that if you find a book in one of those shared free libraries that you don't think other people should have it's okay to burn it? Is this guy fucking nuts?
Right?!
Yeah they do…
Look at their channels.
They also do response and debunkings too.
That’s not the same thing at all
Debunk and response videos allow you to selectively edit and make scripted responses
While not without some merit, they are not as Intellectually sincere as a actual discussion
@@savannahfan yes that’s why I stated “they also”
They do debates and response videos respectfully.
I know I am a nobody but I will debate you. Let's go
Honestly the LDS church is not very much like the Book of Mormon. There are clear trinitarian scriptures in it. There are clear denouncements of plural marriage. There are clear denouncements of secret societies. The stories are clearly false. But the actual doctrine/theology is not much different than your mainline Protestant church
Agreed up until the "not much different than your mainline Protestant church". As someone who was raised Mormon but was saved by the Grace of God and now attends a non-denominational church, this comment couldn't be further from the truth.
@@BrendonKing what is different about it? Mosiah chapter 4 sounds like a Protestant sermon to me
@@Adam-ww8ei The book of mormon teaches a very modalistic god. We would both agree this is heretical (I'm assuming you're Roman Catholic)
Mosiah 15:1-4 - “And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son - The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son - And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.”
Mosiah 16:15 - “Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen.”
Alma 11:38-40 - “Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father? And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last; and he shall come into the world to redeem his people; and he shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name; and these are they that have eternal life, and salvation cometh unto none else.”
3 Nephi 1:14 - “Behold, I come unto my own, to fulfill all things which I have made known unto the children of men from the foundation of the world, and to do the will, both of the Father and of the Son-of the Father because of me, and of the Son because of my flesh.”
Mormon 9:12 - “Behold, he created Adam, and by Adam came the fall of man. And because of the fall of man came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son; and because of Jesus Christ came the redemption of man.”
Ether 3:14 - “Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have light, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters.”
Ether 4:8, 12 - “And he that will contend against the word of the Lord, let him be accursed; and he that shall deny these things, let him be accursed; for unto them will I show no greater things, saith Jesus Christ; for I am he who speaketh. . .For behold, I am the Father, I am the light, and the life, and the truth of the world.
Says the guy that has likely not read the whole Book of Mormon. Just regurgitating 150 year old arguments that were afraid to lose their congregants and had to come up with fearful tactics.
7:16 I really like the concept of a “hell shelf.” As someone who owns several gnostic and occult texts, I agree with the idea that researching the opposing/heretical views makes it easier to articulately preach against such views
Anyone who says Latter-Day Saints are adverse to or even discouraged to have debate/dialogue is clearly an ignoramus lol.
Where's the proof? Why aren't Mormons coming on to debate with this channel?
Fahrenheit 451.
Mormons have debated and continue to debate people on TH-cam. There are many videos.
Are there videos of Mormons debating Catholics or the Eastern Orthodox?
What about airing on the side of caution of offending God? The Quran is in opposition to Christianity can we burn that one? would love to hear these question discussed more closely
Yes, we can and should.
Joe has a good approach, and presents his case well.
I have a "heck shelf" in my library too. That's a good term.
Anyone else here because of a Thoughtful Faith post?
Getting mormons to take a serious look at their own church history is the best way for them to learn and even though LDS history is available on LDS websites, most mormons are really discouraged from reading so-called ‘anti’ church material.
Ironic that you’re commenting this under a video that is talking about burning books that might “lead Catholics astray”.
@@adanalyst6925 Also Ironic you are committing on a video about burning books that even you acknowledged could lead people astray. What is your point?
Andrew Wilson (orthodox, runs the Crucible debate channel) even says it’s really hard to set up a debate with Mormons
Latter-day Saint convert from Evangelical Christianity here! Rather than talking about burning or trashing books like the Book of Mormon, why not read it with the intention of rebutting and debunking it? It is a more good faith tactic than suppressing and trashing it. Moreover, wouldn't advocating burning or trashing the book establish a sort of martyr complex, making people want to read it MORE?
6:27 It is very possible the Sinaiticus is so well preserved because a monastery identified it as an Arian copy, refused to use, it laid it in a special place, which is where researchers found it, and therefore never turned the pages.
Obviously, there is a successor of Jack Chick who seems to be doing great work on showing something else : Sinaiticus text as we have it may be an Academic fraud.
Yeah man, I’m sure your strategy is totally gonna win people over to Jesus (sarcasm).
Hard to argue “feelings”
If you truly wanted that debate to happen then the topic would have been narrowed down to avoid an unproductive debate. It’s akin to asking to debate the validity of the entirety of catholic dogmas in one single debate. That simply ridiculous and you would rightfully reject that proposition. Be honest and admit you guys didn’t want a fair debate. Narrow down the topic as is customary and stop painting this picture that the person just simply backed out and the en lie as to why. You guys are not being honest here.
The mormon church is actually growing and the catholic church (along with most Christians sects) is currently shrinking.
God deems yo favor them more
I mean...that's like saying Israel in the Old Testament wasn't God's chosen people because another nation had a higher birth rate than them and therefore was growing faster than them....doesn't really check out haha
Why does it have to be a debate specifically?
Debates are usually trying to “own” the other and doesn’t foster mutual understanding or good feeling imo.
I love some of the interfaith conversations coming out on TH-cam, the Evangelical pastor exploring Mormonism, Jonathan Pageau and Ruslan, Paul Vanderklay’s discussions with people. Maybe debate is not what’s called for.
Question for the Catholics who would support burning an LDS text... Is this because it proclaims falsehoods about God/Christ, or because it's a "false book" in a religious sense just generally? And would that apply to say something like the Bhagavad Gita from Hinduism? Considering Hinduism is completely detached from any of the Judeo-Christian faiths? As a seeking not-yet-Catholic I'm just curious where that stance would be.
It's obvious misinformation. It could be left if it's in a context that won't bring harm upon people.
But sometimes it is.
So the question is if it is extremely harmful or not to leave it there.
In Acts 19:19 there's a mention of a batch of new converts publicly burning their own books about magic after their conversion. In that case it was more symbolic, perhaps, but you can see the sentiment.
I'm sure that you would advocate for the destruction of SOME books. Everyone does, even if prima facie would deny it. Say, a pornographic book in a school, or a printed album showing minors doing things minors shouldn't do. Those are extremes, but being extremes these are things every ordinary person would agree are unacceptable.
If the Catholic religion is objectively true, can certain books regarding obvious falsehoods that may persuade some good folks, be justifiably removed from certain contexts? If phrased this way, you can see it's not an obvious "Never!" type of answer.
Did my reply post? Seems like it didn't.
I'll just get to the gist of what I posted.
It's not about the book being false per se.
First however let me be clear that taking private property and burning it is never justifiable. This is not in doubt and not claimed by anybody that I've ever heard of.
Everyone actually agrees there's content that shouldn't be present in certain contexts. A p*rnographic book in a middle school, a guide for human sacrifice in an asylum, etc. Those are extremes, but by being extremes every ordinary person would agree they're unacceptable.
A case for burning instead of merely trashing, is in the Bible. In Acts 19:19, a batch of new converts took their old books about magic and burnt them together in public. More symbolic than anything, but it's book burning regardless.
The question in this case is this: Would leaving certain books instead of disposing them bring certain harm to some people? Would, despite all that, be even justifiable?
Personally, if I see a Mormon book or a Qur'an in my hotel room, left there by a previous guest, I'd take it home and discard it. Wouldn't you?
@@crusaderACR Thanks for your reply! I was able to see both comments.
I actually grew up in Utah so have some close relations with a lot of LDS folks. So maybe that colors my view a bit. But I don't think I'd ever burn a Book of Mormon personally. I don't believe in it, but I'm also not Catholic, just someone who's trying to find their way still I suppose, with a leaning towards Catholicism.
Would you consider something like a Book of Mormon that (supposedly, I've never read the Book of Mormon) says differing views/accounts of Jesus is more harmful than a book from a different religious tradition all together (like the Bhagavad Gita)? And would one constitute destroying over the other? Or is it more or less same/same?
@@warshrike9075 It's all measured by harm. I'll go even deeper as you seem interested.
I'll give one historical example. In the Middle Ages there was a Gnostic movement called Catharism. They called themselves the Good Christians.
They had a book called the Secret Supper supposedly written by John Apostle. It claimed to be an extension of the Last Supper. There, Jesus recounts a story.
God made Heaven and all the Angels. A faction rebelled, led by Lucifer. All standard.
Lucifer begs God to spare him a week from torment. God grants him that.
Then, the first thing Satan did was say: "Let there be light"
And it goes on and on. There were also other books.
Their doctrine was basically that Creation is all evil, and we have to reject all that's natural in order to disconnect ourselves from the material world. Otherwise we're cursed to reincarnate forever. Plagues were blessings, marriage was a sin, babies were a curse. They were vegan because milk and eggs were connected to an animal's sexuality.
It took huge traction among the poor and desperate. A whole bloody mess.
If you lived in the 12th century and found an illustrated copy of the Secret Supper, ready to turn a good man into someone wishing the destruction of the whole world, what would you do?
Mormons are not gnostics, nor destructive, nor anything like that. I'm just giving one huge and obvious example of how a false account of Christ can go HORRIBLY wrong.
In select cases I would indeed discard a book. But it's case by case. The Church has gotten rid of most Gnostic stuff, except a few copies for its historical value, yet actually encouraged the reading of many pagan books during higher education. Bhagavad Gita wasn't readily available in Europe, but Pythagoreanism also taught reincarnation etc and it was deemed fine. Aristotle was almost treated like Gospel. Plato was a must-read in any higher study.
So the problem is NOT that books can be mistaken or pagan. The question is if certain books would coerce good people into ideologies that are destructive, to themselves or to the world.
The Book of Mormon is fine. But I think it teaches falsehoods about Christ and (most crucially) teaches severe falsehoods about God. Making the Father into a material creature, and treating the Godhead as Three Gods with One Purpose is actually not only not Christian, it's not even Abrahamic. It could lead good monotheists into very grave error. For that, I pray it doesn't spread too much, and if it doesn't infringe the dignity or rights of anyone I may do something about it.
If you disagree in any way I'd like you to elaborate on why.
@@crusaderACR Thank you for the detailed reply! That was very insightful and does make some sense of the matter.
I guess I do disagree in a way, but as I said I'm not really intertwined into any teachings of any church at this moment, so I think I just naturally lean towards the "leave it be camp". More or less because I don't have a "right" or "wrong" view from any specific religious standpoint if that makes sense. And using your example of the Church keeping copies of Gnostic texts for historical value, I think that's extremely important as well. For better or for worse, I've always been a person that ideologically lives in the in between spaces. As a result, it's hard for me to find good reason to burn/destroy/discard religious texts or anything of the sort, because frankly, I'm not even sure what I, myself believe in.
From a Catholic standpoint, I can understand the reasoning. I just don't think I'm quite on board with it just yet.
Ultimately though, I'm not trying to argue one way or the other is correct. I was really just curious what the difference in stance would be between a supposed Christian church teaching heretical doctrine and a completely different religious tradition all together with their assortment of texts/beliefs.
I was a Mormon for 8 years. It's still a messy thing to know how to make sense of what's the deal with them. Where I'm at now is...they had a crazy past as a cult that's since turned into a glorified self improvement program ran by very smart business men. I went back to services here and there and I always felt like I was attending a business meeting rather than participating in a religious experience. Everything felt like what a religion would be like if you put engineers and finance people in charge. It felt more like I was being taught how to maximize efficiency in obtaining communion with God. I think it's a very healthy lifestyle but a religion?
So true I’m still attending LDS service and I feel the same way
@@thay2829 Are you exploring Christianity as a result?
Everyone feels different when they attend. I suggest you ask yourself how to make it a more uplifting experience and faith filled uplifting experience that brings you closer to Christ. The church can’t do that for you without your striving!
Theyll debate/converse more than JW's.
When I was a JW, we where specifically told never to debate
One Mormon I know of who isn’t afraid to step into the ring is Alma Allred. There was a protestant public access tv show in Utah called the “The Ancient Paths” and he stepped into the ring with them multiple times. The episodes are on TH-cam. He also had public discussions with James White which are also on TH-cam. I recommend contacting him for a discussion if he’s still kicking.
2:59 Icing on the cake? The name of the guy who destroyed the statue is "Michael".
"not yet" ??
I caught that too. I used to have a very strong respect for Catholics and their religion, but lately it seems like they're becoming more radicalized and unrepentant about the dark aspects of their history. It would be a disaster if they ever had the power to enact these dreadful fantasies.
How do you handle a debate with a Mormon when it’s hard to tell when Catholic doctrine stops and LDS doctrine begins? There is a lot of overlap. We baptize with water and the trinitarian formula. I’m not even sure that I would have to be re-baptized if I converted. That’s just for starters. There is a lot more to support the claims of the BOM than the apocrypha. I would ask John Smith for three witnesses and then eight witnesses who could testify to something that is impossible for him to do all by himself. The BOM has witnesses; in accordance with the Law of Witnesses that was put forth by Moses and reiterated by Paul. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall all things be established.” That’s where I’m going to start with any claim contrary to my LDS belief. They might have it. IDK. I’d have to decide if I really care enough to change anyway and then seek the Lord for discernment a d guidance. God bless you anyway; if people won’t listen to you they won’t listen to us either. You might just take people off our hands that don’t have the nerve to stand by the Book of Mormon. They would become a stumbling block for us. Yet, you can teach them many great things and they will grow and progress in a relationship with Christ and all will be well. The Book of Mormon teaches us that the Lord blesses men according to their desires. You might laugh, I’m sure this is ripe for mockery, but the BOM speaks to our desires. I know where William Tyndall is on my family tree. I’m descended from his sister. Most of my ancestors who lived in the time of Joseph Smith knew him and left Nauvoo to go to Salt Lake. I have Native American Ancestors. Some of my ancestors settled Jamestown and intermarried with the Potomacs. If the BOM is true the likelihood is that BOM figures like Lego, Nephi and Laman and Lemuel are back there on the family tree. I have very little if any Southern European ancestors. Rome was great but it was the enemy of my ancestors. So yeah, maybe the Lord understands our plight and blessed us anyway.
Dear PWA, speaking of no debate, i would like to have some friendly debate with you re NFP, and how this "perversion of the right order" paves the way for other perversions to be licit. IOW, we can't fix divorce / annulment / contraception / homo / abortion until we get rid of licit NFP.
Books have no rights! :)
Mormons are nice people.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 I doubt he would speak like this about muslims and their book.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 Sure. But not current mormons.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 Preemptive violence? That's immoral.
@@thejoshuaproject3809 You cannot act against someone preemptively. If you suspect they would act against you if they had power, is no reason to attack their property.
I hope you meant kind people, and thank you. 😊 I like kind better than nice.
So Ron Swanson was justified in throwing vegan bacon into the trash? Great!
Um, starting out, before you get to yammering brethren, I want to say *Ward Radio* called you out months ago. If not them, friend of the show, *Thoughtful Faith, would take you up, Bruce, on a logical debate. I would myself, but I'm much too busy. For example, I put this in a playlist for religious studies less than a week ago and had already added more than a handful of more videos to the already over 300+ selection as is. Not to mention all the rearranging I'm prone to do therein. Worth mentioning though, is my uncouth manor of wit as is means if I were to debate you, sir, I would likely string in a few Ad Hominems along with all the bluer terms I'd profoundly express. Heaven forbid if I were to comment any other fallacies as I go about the way. But until then, you're still wrong, catholics. The universe does not resolve around Rome and her sanctified representatives. 🙏🏻
*not sure if that's the proper channel name. Pretty sure TH-cam will still hide this comment regardless.
Dang, oh well. ☦️
"Iron sharpens Iron". Ah, the prudence of king Solomon's Proverbs. Allow me to then reference some New Testament lore. "Test every spirit..." 📖
You do that with the Book of Mormon and you'll see, it indeed details the 3 criteria the guest expressed for keeping such scripts about you. I do not keep so regularly books I disagree with, though got for tomorrow's dream, a book about the Gnostic Gospels, a booklet entitled True to the Faith, an Icon I recently picked up at the All Things Catholic store (shout out to Molly, she's a cutie for sure). As well as various Lutheran works below and betwixt my arts. I'm not going to debate either of you. Again, I recommend Ward Radio and their personal affiliates. God bless brethren & get outta my way!
@p.doetsch6209 No one is confused here, the discussion was removing the book of Mormon, or CCC, from a public library. Nobody was discussing moral theology 0:02
What he described does sound like it could be ADHD hyperfocus. Ultimately though I'm sure some non-ADHD can have something that approximates that. I know for me day to day it's being so lost in 10 incomplete thoughts (hyperbole at times to say 10 but sometimes it literally is that) that I have a hard time paying attention to other things. It takes a lot for my brain to slow down enough to especially just be natural in social situations, especially if it's a woman I'm interested in.
I love a lot of Mormons. I will never beat up on Mormons, I get along with them very well.
It is true however that there is a strong reluctance in Mormon culture against theological and philosophical analysis of the claims of their own church.
I am very willing to accept criticism of the Catholic Church, I issue much of it myself, but within the bounds of civil reason, rhetoric, and dialog.
Mormons generally are more prone to "stamp out doubt" for practical maintenance than to engage in critical analysis of how something "ought to be".
It likely is tied to the number of baptized they lose year-to-year. It is a lot.
Sadly, they don't usually lose them to Christian groups, but to agnosticism or atheism.
"You support burning this bad book that you think leads people to hell, but you wouldn't like it if someone burned your good book that you think leads people to heaven"
If you think the above is a gotcha, compare it to the following.
"You think it's okay to put a criminal into prison, but you don't think it's okay to put a innocent person into prison."
Mormons won't talk about their religion? Ummm....I don't buy that .
Incorrect. They specifically referenced debate where Mormons would have to provide proof and counter-arguments instead of uncritical acceptance.
Hey Joe! From Dr. Michael Otteson at Utah State University (a non Latter-day Saint whom you are acquainted with): "Please stop talking about Mormonism. You are making a fool of yourself"
Hell, I'm sure he'd be willing to debate you (representing the LDS position) even as a non Latter-day Saint.
About what specifically? I'm a Latter-day Saint and I'm curious what a non-member thinks Matt is getting wrong.
@@daniallemmon5453 Putting "disagrees" in all caps as if you're making a point 🤣
I noted from the outset that Dr. Otteson was not a Mormon.. So yeah, he obviously disagrees with Mormonism on some level.... Duh.
However, he is someone who values intellectual honesty, and would be willing to defend a worldview that he feels isn't being represented fairly. That's what good philosophers do.
I'm guessing you didn't catch it, but my quotation is a direct quote from him.... As in, I directly heard it from his lips as he was speaking to me. I'm not speculating. I don't just like him because of what he says about the "council of heaven"..I know him personally.
Also, what blog are you referring to..... I've been his student for a number of years now, and have never heard about a blog. It's very possible I just haven't heard of it of course.. Perhaps you could link it? Are you sure you're thinking of the right person?
@@lukehanson_Sorry for taking forever to see this. Some time has passed, so I can't remember the specifics. He just thinks that Joe (and other Catholic content creators) misrepresent Latter-day Saint beliefs on a number of levels.
Even though he finds our claims unpersuasive, he still thinks that views should be fairly represented when they're being critiqued.
@@lukehanson_ I think you also responded to my comment on Brian Holdsworth's new video haha
Also, you've been on Thoughtful Faith haven't you?
@@ethanf.237 haha yeah that might have been me. And yes I've been on Thoughtful Faith and less of Ward Radio
maybe you could try gospel tangents or these two are not mormon but are evangelicals that seem to have found a way in - mormon book reviews and hello saints
I have a lot of love for the devotion found in many members of the LDS. I think many are good people who want to do right by God and there is something always admirable to be found in that; the quality that can be found in any faith, but only brought to blossom in one, being the true believer who wants to love God.
With that said, I have no idea how Mormons can claim in any way shape or form to be Christian. They might not believe in the prophet Muhammed, but they're about as far from Christians as Muslims
I have burned several books of Mormon. I've read the book of mormon, the doctrines and covenant, and the pearl of great price. It's utter garbage and needs to be removed.
Pope John Paul II kissed a Qur'an...
Right...hoping it was the kiss of death?
_"__10:28__ ironically one of the reasons those __10:30__ falsehoods flourish is because they __10:32__ don't just go back and forth in a way __10:35__ that that brings the truth"_
One of the reasons falsehood flourish about me, is, I propose debate time after time, and am blocked, ignored, have content taken down, have thousands of readers in Hong Kong tell the 43 readers in France to continue making access to my blogs perhaps not difficult, but at least discouraged, over here.
Joe's answer is so lame
I would invite you to read 3 Nephi in the Book of Mormon and tell me what the text claims about Jesus that is heretical.
The issue is not whether it's heretical or not. Anyone can write a book that for the most part coincides with Christian views. It's that it claims to be of God or in as it describes itself, "Another Testament of Jesus Christ". Here are the issues with that claim.
1. The LDS church no longer claims that Native Americans are the primary ancestors of the Lamanites is extremely problematic. Where it was sure that they were of Lamanite descent, they have since changed their story to say that they can't really tell what happened to them. The Book of Mormon was written for the Lamanites according to the Book of Mormon itself. If there are no Lamanites around anymore then I think that begs the question.
2.The church with all of it's "prophets, seers and revelators" can't even tell us where the events in the Book of Mormon took place. The church put out a video in the late seventies tying the Book of Mormon to the pre-columbian Mexican, Central and South American civilizations like the Aztecs and Mayans. Now there is a push coming from well intentioned but misguided members of the church that say it took place in North America instead. The church holds no opinion because it doesn't want to be pinned down if proven wrong.
3. The Book of Mormon was "translated" from plates that were written in reformed Egyptian which is a language that doesn't and has never existed, using a stone that was found by Joseph while digging for treasure which he later used to search for treasure himself which he never found, placed that stone in a hat which showed him the words that were contained on the plates while they remained on a table covered.
These are just three main points that come to mind quickly. You can be sincere in your belief that the Book of Mormon is true but that doesn't mean it is what it is. Also using Moroni's challenge is not a good measure to determine whether something is true or not because there are people in all faiths that will give you their testimony that their church is the true one because of a spiritual experience that told them so.
@@Thicknchunky- Hear Hear! Don’t stop man!
@@genericyoutubeuser3828Hosea 4:6
@@genericyoutubeuser3828 Jesus is the Truth and the Devil is the father of all lies. Thus, we must distinguish between lies (Joseph Smith) and the truth (the one true Catholic Church).
Galatians 1 specifically warns Christians not to fall under the spell of other gospels, even if preached by an "angel of heaven". And yet, here comes Joseph Smith, glass-looker and Freemason, to tell us that he has been given the real gospel, in its fullness this time, 1800 years after Christ gave us His. This gospel just happens to allow him to take 36 teenage brides behind the back of his faithful wife.
I’ve noticed that Mormons will debate evangelicals (and they do quite well). I’ve always thought it strange that they won’t debate Catholics. At the end of the day, I think Catholic arguments are much stronger and more compelling than most evangelical apologists. They probably know that as well.
no longer burning people alive at the stake for heresy, but still discussing burning books...well, it seems that the French Revolution and Napoleon Buonaparte were not so wrong after all...
What, you prefer the guillotine to burning books?
@@folofus4815 - LOL amazing how obtuse you can be - my point is that the secular backlash (extremely shocking to me as a beginner in history) agaiinst the RC has to be seen against centuries of burning heretics alive at the stake in public and the extreme violence against the Cathars and the Hugenots, etc. But of course you may just be feigning obtuseness - it is not a comfortable topic for you. And never forget - 'No expects the Spanish Inquisition!' Well, especially not after Bonaparte marching into Madrid and putting a stop to it. LOL
No, actually they were quite wrong. The Catholic Church was easily the most humane large organization of this time period. Ancient history was harsh, but the Church has done an immense amount of good.
OK book idolater
@@robertdolcetti450the Catholic Church has been the most humane and benevolent organization of all time, from 33ad to the present day.
Error has no rights
And neither does your error. So you are a hypocrite.
Debate Robert Boylan. Oh wait you won't.
You’ll never debate a Mormon because they don’t actually care about truth. All we can do is pray for them that Our Lady will soften their hearts.
When I was an evangelical convert from Mormonism in University one of my friends (who had just become an Evangelical) burned his girlfriend’s Book of Mormon. I can attest to the fact that it did not cause her to want to know more about the Jesus of the Bible. 🤦♀️ I’m always tempted to take the BoMs that are available in Marriott hotel rooms so that the next guest is not mislead, but I’ve never done so. I figure Marriott has masses of BoMs available to refill the gap in whatever room I was in, but it is tempting!
You should do it. Those books are there so people would take them, the difference here is that you'd just throw it in the bin very quickly.
Or burn it. I mean obviously you should NEVER burn other people's private property, but that book would be your own, and it's heroically biblical to burn books you own that are actually harmful. Acts 19:19 showed people do just that, except by several new converts and it was done in public.
@@crusaderACR keep it up chief, keep doing what you are doing and show the world why the Roman Catholic church is no better today than it was a thousand years ago.
@@BrendonKing Was there anything wrong with what I said?