SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Articles and Sermons : When the Constitution “Hangs by a Thread” – The White Horse Prophecy in Modern Mormonism

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
PosterThread
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hi Frank,

Quote:

It is strange to me that at the possibility that you were slighted, you go to great lengths to defend yourself and about the importance of truth and then you say that the original poster is lying and spreading rumor.



Easy there, Frank. Please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say that the original poster was lying. That is untrue. I simply urged caution in spreading a rumor about a "white horse prophecy" that is, in fact, an unsubstantiated rumor/myth that has been denied by the very people who are supposed to believe it.

Secondly, I hope that you understand the difference between "defending" one's self and simply setting the record straight when someone (subtly) makes an allegation.

In this thread, you mentioned how it takes "eyes to see" and "ears to hear" in order to arrive to the opinion -- which wasn't presented as an opinion -- that you shared with another brother. The subtle accusation was that those of us who do not share that opinion lack properly discerning spiritual eyes and ears. When I mentioned it to you, you mentioned something about how if a shoe fits that I should wear it and then told me to judge myself.

I learned a long time ago that individuals wouldn't be accused of "defending" themselves if they weren't also "attacked" for either personal reasons or for the caution that they urge.

Quote:

It seems that you have made a judgement call that someone is lying brother, you need to re-read the original post and point out who is lying. The context of this thread is the laying out of evidences of what the Mormons believe and the OP made an excellent case. Your sole refutation of the OP is that five years after announcing this prophecy publicly, the head of the Mormons then renounced it. That is your sole evidence to refute the OP, the words of the leader of a Satanic cult?



Frank, this is simply untrue. I cannot understand how you could even come to such a fallacious conclusion.

Again, I did NOT say that the original poster was lying. I simply pointed out that the "white horse prophecy" is nothing more than a myth and rumor. Christians are NOT supposed to be given to such things. We are not supposed to spread myths, old wives tales and the like (I Timothy 4:7). This is true regardless if the subject of those rumors are true believers, unbelievers or members of a cult.

As for the rumor/myth itself: There has been no citation...no evidence...no proof presented to substantiate it. You just claimed that the prophecy was presented and then renounced five years later. So, where is your credible sources for this proclamation? The very cult in question denies this (which is odd given that they don't deny so many other crazy things that they renounced).

Now, to be very clear: This prophecy could be based upon something real. However, YOU do not know it. I don't know it. I have looked into this intently with more than just a few internet searches or books about the Mormon cult. All that I can find is the supposed "prophecy" that is alleged and the fact that I have never seen any evidence that the Mormon cult ever embraced it.

So, an honest presentation of this would be to clearly introduce it as a rumor/myth. Yet, that isn't what happened here. A few individuals repeated this rumor/myth as a means to substantiate why it would be wrong to vote for Mitt Romney. The rumor wasn't presented as a rumor. It wasn't stated that the Mormons claim that this isn't even true. It was presented as either a fact or something important to consider when thinking about whether or not to vote for Governor Romney.

Quote:
Wow. As I said Chris, if you have any credible evidence to suggest that the OP is merely lies and rumors, you should present that rather than the ususal " I dont know anyone who believes that," that is not evidence.



Again, brother, this is not true. I didn't say that the original poster was lying. Brother Greg simply posted a article that was copied from a website that he cited. I obviously oppose the teachings and doctrines of Mormonism (that was never in doubt). I am simply calling into question the presentation of this rumor/myth as a fact.

And, I didn't say that "I don't know anyone who believes that" in the context of this rumored and mythical "prophecy." And, brother, you need to constrain yourself from further attacks when I truthfully say that I don't know anyone who believes a stereotype that you or others espouse about entire groups. It is WRONG to stereotype or label a group based upon what you or others may deduce about them.

Could you imagine how SermonIndex would be perceived if we judged it upon what others might say about this community? If worldly men deduce that SermonIndex is "a Calvinist community" because a few loud individuals share their views about the matter, it would be wrong for them to proclaim a public judgment about the website based upon a portion of the individuals involved here.

We shouldn't be so easily given to stereotypes, assumptions, myths and rumors. We shouldn't be given to repeating them too. Our lips should be cleaner than that.

Quote:

Earlier Miccah suggested that he merely was disagreeing with you and presenting what the Lord had laid on his heart. Are you saying the Lord has told you something different? Are you saying that the Lord did not lay this on the brothers heart. You seem to have a very big problem anytime someone says " The Lord spoke to me." God does speak to His people, and He leads them and He guides them and He is very clearly laying it on the hearts of many saints about the dangers of having a Satanic cult leader as their leader. Now you would think that this would be obvious, but as I said before, we live in days of blindness and a sleeping church..............bro Frank



Maybe this is the root of the problem, Frank. You are again making an assumption about me that is simply untrue.

I do believe that God speaks to men in this day. I could tell you stories that would give goosebumps about how the Lord has spoken to me or led me in supernatural ways.

I could express how God even told me the names of individuals that I did not know while I was out sharing the Lord in malls and streets. I could express how the Lord told me specific "secrets of the heart" of certain individuals and how I shared those things while sharing the Gospel with them...and how the Lord used those things to draw them to Christ. I could tell you of visions, dreams and words that the Lord has shared with me. I could tell you about how a house that I lived in was hit by a tornado, but I was rescued because someone had knocked on my door (and I went to answer it just as the tornado hit and tore of the roof and other things everywhere except the door where I stood answering the knock). There are many, many things that the Lord has done in my life for which I do not share here.

At the same time, I believe that there is a difference between claiming that the "Lord led me" to a particular truth that is anything but universal for the Body of Christ. I have strong opinions about many things. At times, I have been ostracized by many people in the churches that I attended because they knew my opinions on certain subjects.

When I was young in Christ, I sometimes had a difficult time knowing the difference between what was from the Lord and what was an opinion or conclusion that I had reached. As a young believer, I sometimes shared those things with the ol' "God told me" or "the Lord showed me" or "the Lord led me to this" rhetoric. I have since learned to distinguish between what is undoubtedly the Lord's words and what are merely conclusions that I reached on matters.

In this case, there are many believers who have a different conclusion -- after prayer, fasting and study -- than the one that you, Miccah or some others may have arrived to. It would be prideful and arrogant of us to share those things as if "God told me" and then publicly dismiss those of you who disagree as not having "eyes to see" or "ears to hear" what God is saying on the matter.

Of course, in this case, I haven't even received any indication from the Lord about my vote. I currently feel inclined to vote for Mitt Romney -- but as I said DESPITE his religious views. However, I will remain in constant prayer about this matter through election day.

At the same time, I am not to be moved by the whims or claims of other brethren who have arrived to their own conclusion on the matter. I certainly wouldn't guess (or second-guess) their relationship with Christ simply because they have a difference of opinion on the matter that they arrived to after as much prayer direction as I have sought.

So, yes, we are living in the "days of blindness." And, yes, the Church in America (and elsewhere) is largely asleep in the Light. Yet, we are not the Lord's eye doctor. We are not the sleep specialist. We are not the Lord's shoe-inspector (even if we suggest that the "shoe fits"). We are not the authority by which we can present "white horse prophecy" as if it were anything other than a myth or rumor knowing that others might also repeat it as such. We are not even the authority by which others should base each and every doctrinal conclusion on non-essential matters.

So, our lips should be pure enough to only present the truth. If something doesn't pass the muster of undeniable truth, then we should disclaim it as much. There is nothing wrong with saying that something is a myth or rumor if we aren't -- or shouldn't be -- entirely certain that it is true. There is nothing wrong with saying "I don't know" if it is said in honesty. This doesn't make us less spiritual. However, there is a danger in the opposite attitude.

Brother, I hope that you understand that this is not personal. I am not endeavoring to "defend" myself from your suggestions. I am simply trying to clarify something that you said that wasn't accurate in a description of me or what I believe. And, of course, I certainly believe that the Lord speaks to us and guides His people in this day. However, I also know that many cults arose from what "God said" to certain individuals. We must rightly divide the Word of Truth...and we must be careful when we present something as being from the Lord or being from ourselves. And, of course, we must avoid gossip, myths and rumors. I believe that God is pleased with such honesty and purity of speech.

Quote:

But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. - I Timothy 4:7


_________________
Christopher

 2012/7/21 15:33Profile









 Re:

Hey Chris,

I think it is pretty clear that we disagree about many things and I see no fruit in any continuing back and forth. And since there seems to be no way forward and we have both spoken our piece, we should let the original post ,and discussion on it presume and may the Lord alone be our judge, I am sure you can agree to that? I for one would be glad to hear any evidence that you have to refute the original post, that seems to be the way to move forward. Seems like threads get hijacked by people who are slighted and it all becomes about the person who believes he is slighted and then the thread is shut down. Lets keep our eye on the ball, Mitt Romney is clearly a leader of a Satanic cult, do you agree or disagree with that Chris?.............bro Frank ( requires only a yes or no for clarity)

 2012/7/21 15:51
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hi Frank,

I agree that we probably will not reach a consensus on the specific issue of voting or whether a believer can believe that Mitt Romney is a better choice for a presidential term in comparison with Barack Obama despite their religious views. And, yes, I would be delighted if we would refrain from guessing or attempting to judge the spiritual "eyes" and "ears" of those with whom we disagree.

As for asking me to present evidence: That is an issue. Why? Because I am not the one repeating the rumor/myth. You see, in previous discussions on SermonIndex, individuals have introduced accusations and then asked others to "prove" them wrong. That is not the proper way to discuss an issue. This is what evolutionists and global warming activists do to try and substantiate their positions in some classrooms. The burden of proof is with the person making the claim. If there is no evidence, then there is no real rationale in trying to "disprove" something that was never fully proven in the first place.

However, I have cited (in a couple of these discussions, complete with links) where the leaders of the Mormon cult have refuted this rumor/myth that is often repeated (mostly by non-Mormons). There are many, many things wrong with the Mormon cult, but we can't conclude that the "white horse prophecy" is undoubtedly one of them since we cannot prove its validity in the first place. It is, after all, just a rumor and myth. I am simply urging caution before we spread that rumor or find ourselves given to it.

Quote:

Seems like threads get hijacked by people who are slighted and it all becomes about the person who believes he is slighted and then the thread is shut down.



Oddly enough, I find that those individuals who feel that the thread gets hijacked by people who they assume feel "slighted" are often the ones who are actually doing the "slighting" in question. Now, I have no desire to shut down this discussion. Nor do I feel that I am getting my eyes off "the ball." The original article that was pasted in the original post was about a "white horse prophecy." Since there has never been any proof presented here or elsewhere that it is authentic, then I simply urge caution in regard to spreading it (or, at least, spreading it as a fact).

In regard to Governor Mitt Romney: He is certainly a member of the Mormon cult. However, I have seen no evidence that he is a "leader" of the cult any more than we could conclude that a "deacon" or Sunday School teacher at the First Baptist Church of Albuquerque, NM (if there is such a congregation) can be called "a leader" of the Southern Baptist Convention.

And, more important, I do disagree with the premise for which you are trying to arrive. I do not vote for a president on the basis of his religious views. I simply think that it is possible to conclude that one man might be a better choice over the other despite their religious views or affiliations.

I have known believers in churches for which, if I had to choose between that person or an unbeliever, I might prefer the unbeliever in a position of employment. That is not saying that I would disagree with their faith. It is just that some believers are (sadly) bad or unskilled workers. I have been asked to be a "reference" for some believers for which I could never give them a ringing endorsement in matters of work ethic or skill...even if I appreciate that brother in terms of his faith.

In this case, the choice for Americans is between two individuals who belong to cult religious groups. The third choice (outside of minor candidates who have no chance of winning in a two-party system) is to simply abstain from voting. However, this too has consequences.

Previously, I explained how a former member of the Clinton campaign team (during one of my university classes ) admitted to spreading "misinformation" and "rumors" about Bob Dole and George H. W. Bush. They didn't do this with the expectation of earning the votes of Christians -- but in the hope that the Christians would embrace it, spread it and that other Christians would simply stay away from the voting booths on election day or vote for the more conservative candidates. They presented statistical evidence in which those extremely close elections (separated by a few percentage points) were "decided" by the individuals who simply stayed away from the polls or voted for a third party candidate.

I also used an analogy about a bus driver. In a practical sense, if I needed a ride to work, I would prefer to ride the bus driven by the more experienced driver (with a better driving record) than the one with the bad record. The religious views of the drivers aren't quite so consequential when I am concerned with arriving to work safely and on time. Of course, I also pray for the salvation of the drivers too. :-)

So, your "yes" or "no" answer is not quite so "cut-and-dry" when it might be a bit loaded and is meant to reinforce a position for which I disagree. Yes, Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Yes, Barack Obama is a Liberation Theology cult member. However, no, I have not seen anything that would make me think that Mitt Romney is a "leader" of the Mormon cult. And, in the broader picture, yes, I still might think that Mitt Romney might be a better choice than the alternative of having Barack Obama in that position for another four years...and this is despite any religious affiliation or views that he might hold.

So, I hope that this series of "yes" and "no" answers in regard to specific parts of your question and conclusion might provide the clarity that you asked for.


_________________
Christopher

 2012/7/21 17:29Profile
Blayne
Member



Joined: 2012/5/27
Posts: 274


 Re:

by ccchhhrrriiisss on 2012/7/21 12:33:26
=========================================

Hi! 'Ccchhhrrriiisss'

I'm jus' droppin' in to say that, while I don't know much about this subject matter (Mormons an' whatever), I did very much enjoy reading the bits and pieces referencing your personal experience and testimony.
Thanks for sharing it.

 2012/7/21 17:41Profile









 Re:

Chris makes this assertion..............

"In regard to Governor Mitt Romney: He is certainly a member of the Mormon cult. However, I have seen no evidence that he is a "leader" of the cult any more than we could conclude that a "deacon" or Sunday School teacher at the First Baptist Church of Albuquerque, NM (if there is such a congregation) can be called "a leader" of the Southern Baptist Convention."

One really has to question why this kind of statement is made when it it public knowledge that Romney was a Bishop in the Mormon cult, now what is a Bishop in Momonism........

Bishop is the highest priesthood office of the Aaronic priesthood in the Latter Day Saint movement, and is leader of the Aaronic priesthood in a given ward or congregation. It is almost always held by one who already holds the Melchizedek Priesthood office of high priest and who serves as the leader of a local congregation of church members. The Latter Day Saint concept of the office differs significantly from the role of bishops in other Christian denominations, being in some respects more analogous to a pastor or parish priest. Each bishop serves with two counselors, which together form a bishopric.

Romney was also " Stake President," and he held these offices for ten years. Now what is a stake? A stake is an administrative unit composed of multiple congregations in denominations of the Latter Day Saint movement. These mutilple congregations are comparable of a diocese in the Cathlolic church.Now this is public knowledge, the positions of Mitt Romney. Anyone who is involved in any kind of debate about Mitt Romney knows this or should know this. To say that he held a position that was the same as a Sunday school teacher or perhaps a deacon of a single church, well, in truth, I truly do not know where that is coming from.

Just as an addition, the Mormon church believe that America is the New Jersualam. Mitt Romney's father was a " patriarch" of the Mormon church. As I said before, Mitt Romney holds high office within a Satanic cult and he is most definately not some " some Sunday school teacher." ..........bro Frank

 2012/7/21 21:07
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Frank,

Quote:

One really has to question why this kind of statement is made when it it public knowledge that Romney was a Bishop in the Mormon cult, now what is a Bishop in Momonism........



First of all, I applaud anyone who feels the need to "really has to question this kind of statement." I don't expect anyone to take my word, opinion or view on this matter at anything more than the words of a man. We should do this with all men.

This afternoon, I was reminded of something that Brother Paul Washer said at one of the conferences. He was making a statement about "trust" in regard to a young man with his daughter (or, perhaps, his son with a young lady). He was asked whether he "trusted" that they would be fine and he said something to the effect that he doesn't trust them because he doesn't trust himself. I suspect that he meant that -- even with a heart that longs for God -- Brother Paul Washer is fully aware of his own flawed humanity and nature enough to be so trusting of anyone with his child.

In this context, I was thinking of the propensity of believers (myself included) to assert something that we feel "sure" of and present it as a fact. We can blame it on God ("God told me," "God showed me," "the Lord led me to this," etc...), but it doesn't necessarily mean that it is true, that we should share it as such or that we should accept it as such. We should welcome it when individuals test everything that we have to say. It shouldn't be offensive when we all are seeking truth.

As for the "bishop" position:

Quote:

Bishop is the highest priesthood office of the Aaronic priesthood in the Latter Day Saint movement, and is leader of the Aaronic priesthood in a given ward or congregation. It is almost always held by one who already holds the Melchizedek Priesthood office of high priest and who serves as the leader of a local congregation of church members. The Latter Day Saint concept of the office differs significantly from the role of bishops in other Christian denominations, being in some respects more analogous to a pastor or parish priest. Each bishop serves with two counselors, which together form a bishopric.

Romney was also " Stake President," and he held these offices for ten years. Now what is a stake? A stake is an administrative unit composed of multiple congregations in denominations of the Latter Day Saint movement. These mutilple congregations are comparable of a diocese in the Cathlolic church.Now this is public knowledge, the positions of Mitt Romney. Anyone who is involved in any kind of debate about Mitt Romney knows this or should know this. To say that he held a position that was the same as a Sunday school teacher or perhaps a deacon of a single church, well, in truth, I truly do not know where that is coming from.



In the statement that I was responding to, you mentioned that Governor Romney was "a leader of a Satanic cult" (Mormonism). The word "leader" can mean many different things. He was NOT a head of the Mormon church or in a position of institutional authority. He was merely a lay leader of his local congregation and area. Their cult is not run like traditional Christian churches. Their "titles" can be just as frivolous as those in "high church" traditions of "Christianity."

In the sense of "cult leadership," Romney wasn't appointed to a role in national leadership of the Mormon cult as a whole, nor was he directing the views or philosophies of that cult. He was just an unpaid lay worker in that cult. To suggest that he was a "cult leader" is like suggesting that an unpaid volunteer who oversees the distribution of clothing for Salvation Army centers here in the Bay Area is a "leader" of the Salvation Army. So, this is what I meant when I responded to the term "leader" in your statement.

Yet, even your statement/question about leadership is somewhat beside-the-point. Like I said, Romney is undoubtedly a member of the cult. He was a faithful adherent to that cult. However, Americans (including Christians) are not voting for that cult. The election is about which man would be the better choice for the next term as president. And, like I also said, many people -- including believers -- may prayerfully decide to vote for Mitt Romney despite his religious views.

In regard to this topic, we are discussing the rumor that has been repeated about the "white horse prophecy." Since there just isn't any evidence to validate the claim, we must be careful about repeating it. If we feel a need to repeat it, we should be clear that it is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumor/myth that the Mormons themselves deny.

I hope that clarifies my response to you.


_________________
Christopher

 2012/7/21 21:47Profile
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Thank you, brother Blayne.


_________________
Christopher

 2012/7/21 21:48Profile









 Re:

I posted this before at the end of a thread and the thread just ended with this post, but I can't find it.

Ed Decker has been in the ministry of teaching others about Mormonism for over three decades. No desire to stir the pot but I think that many would say that he is plugged-in, as far as any info on Mormonism goes. He was the one source that we had before computers. But as with Greg's article - it's a matter of believing a believer or believing the disclaimers that are Mormons, I suppose.


"Ed Decker, founder of Saints Alive, was a Mormon for 20 years of his adult life. He was a member of the Melchizedek priesthood, a Temple Mormon and active in many church positions. Through a crisis in his life, Ed met the real Jesus and his life was changed forever. An active author, speaker and evangelist, Ed has brought the light of Biblical truth to uncountable thousands of those lost in spiritual darkness.
Ed Decker has written several books and with Dave Hunt wrote the book "The God Makers""

http://www.saintsalive.com/resourcelibrary/mormonism/the-mormon-plan-for-america-and-the-rise-of-mitt-romney


Only weighing in this article and site.

 2012/7/21 22:14









 Re:

JIG writes........

"it's a matter of believing a believer or believing the disclaimers that are Mormons, I suppose."

This is the part I feel very disturbed about. The OP is handily dismissed and the only evidence put forward to dispute the opening post is the disclaimer by the head of the Satanic cult itself. Now it seems that we are to equate the office of bishop and the stake president within the Mormon church with that of a "Sunday school teacher."

It is acknowledged, kinda, that it is a Satanic cult that believes Jesus is the brother of Satan, God the Father, who was one time a man, had relations with Mary and that you too can become a God just like God the Father. They further believe that America is the New Jerusalem. Yet, despite all of that, it is still being " prayerfully considered," as to whether it is right to help put this high ranking, extremly influential person into an office that would, in effect, make him the most powerful man in the world. I would simply say this to the readers of this thread, and this will be my last word on this thread, read back and look at the rationale, the minimising that has taken place. And now I will make an assumption about many voters in the upcoming election, most wont even go to the trouble of mimimizing that Chris has went to. They will simply vote for him because he is a Republican and not President Obama, forgetting that there are bigger schemes afoot than a presidential election in America.

While most of Christendom sleeps, the enemy approaches. And by asleep I mean for the most part, distracted by the things of this world, including politics. Yet praise the Lord our Lord is also to soon return and the more His return is imminent, the more the enemy knows it and knows that his time is short............bro Frank

 2012/7/22 0:00









 Re:

What I just found strange was that I was checking the weather channel website and was looking for a video that I saw advertised yesterday about a dolphin kissing a dog :)
... but it wasn't up anymore but what came on, in the "Video" section of the site, was commercials of a personal testimony of a man promoting mormon.org.

I've never seen the weather channel have commercials for any other religion but I don't watch TV so I wouldn't know.
I don't know if that commercial will be on their site for long but it's there now.

I just felt that someone is just messing with our heads ... for a lack of a better description for what this world is up to at the moment -- or from now on?

 2012/7/22 1:19





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy