Banned Mormon Cartoon REACTION! 

Yes

Literally

The perfect mix of my favorite things 👌 😂😂

A cheesy, smarmy, overzealous good mythical morning... At least the guys at GMM have a shtick. These kids are selling it hard...& its cotton candy after a rain storm. Like a guy you have one date with and he wants to marry you and you have already decided he is too desperate for a second date. Then again, you have to sell this crap like an 'AS IS' used car.

That is EXACTLY what i was about to say!

They don't consider it the Biblical Jesus.

Faye Lewis I fail to see how that is radically different from your belief. According to you, Satan is an angel created by God who fell and Jesus is God’s son. Both, then are creations of God.

I'm still learning the mormon faith, so correct me if I'm wrong. Here are my questions and thoughts on mormonism: 1) If God was a created being then who created him? Another God? And another God created that God? So on to infinity..? In that case, are there infinity many "gods" without a beginning? My thoughts: Since the universe had a beginning, it must have have an *immatetial* cause that exists beyond space and time. Reality requires ultimate explanation that does not need to be explained by anything else or what we could call "unlimited" being or "existence" itself. This the reason why athiests becomes thiests. 2) If we can become "gods" then wouldn't that contradict the belief that there is only ONE God? Sin entered the world because Adam and Eve disobeyed God out of the desire to Be like him - all-powerful, unlimited, perfect, lacks nothing, ect (basically the definition of God). If we could be his peers (become gods and goddesses) God wouldn't be All-powerful in that sense because we'd be equal to him. “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god." -Isaiah 44:6

Stephanie le To get a fuller and credible answer: Ask the Missionaries.

@@zenosvillondo9733 They'll say, "because the BOM or one of the prophets said so." Cliché answer. The notion that God was created is not logical.

YES!!!! What's also worth noting is that it's not just mormonism either. It's also all of christianity. They "stole" all of their doctrines, stories, beliefs, and so on from more ancient religions that came before them too. One of them also being the beliefs of an ancient Egyptian religion that they "copied" for the lore of Genesis in the old testament.

@@yitoproductions that's ridiculous and completely unfounded. The Bible didn't borrow anything from ancient Egypt. Most secular historians believe Jewish people were never even enslaved there yet they're also willing to say in the same sentence that Jewish people borrowed from ancient Egyptian writings. Which one is it?

@@apostolicwatchman8824 Hey if anything I am just as surprised as you are. I was watching a review for the horror movie Midsommar by the RU-vid channel Comic Book Girl 19, which the movie itself has nothing to do with Christianity or religion in general, and out of nowhere Danika (the young lady who runs the channel and made the video) made a comparison with one of the fictional characters in the film to Christianity and how ironic it was that the writer/director Ari Aster decided to include that in his film. I didn’t watch the review hoping for her to go anti-Christianity and further support my own bias. I watched her review because I loved the movie, and I love her so I wanted to hear her thoughts on it and when I saw that part about Christianity it really threw me off guard since I was NOT expecting that at all. Turns out everything she did say is true and I hold it as fact to this day. I am really happy she mentioned it in her video and that I now have this crucial piece of information, since I am “kinda” against Christianity, but the way that information was given to me was completely unintentional. It just happened and that was that. I highly suggest watching that video to see for yourself that I am not bullshitting you. I could send you a link if you want.

@@yitoproductions you can if you want to, but in all honesty, I've heard so many vague theories I've lost count. Can you give me a legitimate reason for why a person wouldn't want to emulate Jesus?

@@apostolicwatchman8824 Well, no I cannot give a legitimate reason why someone shouldn’t emulate Jesus, because there’s no denying that he leaves a huge impact on society and a lot of people’s lives. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to be like him. If anything, I think it should be encouraged more in a healthy matter, but just like Spider-Man, Batman, or Superman (or any superhero really) they are just stories. Fairytales to inspire a generation to be good. Just like Jesus Christ. They shouldn’t be taken too literally or too seriously, since they are still filled with tons of holes and flaws due to fallible people creating them, but religion has always been taken to the next level. It has always been taken to the extreme. Always have and always will. With superheroes though, they are “usually” taken just at face value, and nothing more and it still manages to get the message across. However, there are obviously exceptions still and I’m sure there are tons of examples of people who take superheroes and comic books to the extreme, but the point is that it’s even MORE likely and even MORE common to find extremists when it comes to religion, than it is when it comes to superheroes or anything that has to do with movies, stories, or books. It’s not healthy and it’s a toxic mindset that more people need to be aware of so we could make genuine progress with humanity and the entire world.

I've watched the Jehovah's Witnesses version of the same video produced by the same people and it's incredibly accurate (admittedly I do know much more about the Watchtower than the LDS church) so idk, these people and their weird He-man style cartoons are pretty damn accurate -- this video in question notwithstanding.

Mormanism is false

That is true. It was incorrect, however. It is a good thing we believe in continuing revelation.

@@Rod_Johnson-Moroni-Saw-Me it was not incorrect. At the time the animation was produced it was 100% accurate regarding that belief

@@francescogorbechov4192 not that it was not believed by some members of the Church, but that the belief itself is incorrect. God's people are just as susceptible to false beliefs as other people. It's just horrible when Saints accept false things as the truth instead of seeking light from God.

@@Rod_Johnson-Moroni-Saw-Me ok… but the church taught as official divinely revealed doctrine for over 180 years that black skin was a curse due to unrighteous actions in a pre mortal life. Instead of saints unscripted just being deceptive and just saying “we don’t believe that”, they should acknowledge that at the time the peace of animation was produced, the part regarding the belief that black skin is a curse was accurate, but the church has changed its doctrine and no longer teaches this.

@@francescogorbechov4192 that was never Church doctrine. That teaching was leftover relics of Protestantism that took longer to get away from than the other false teachings regarding Blacks. There never was or has been an official doctrine of the Church that teaches that Blacks are less valiant spirit children of God. Individuals in the Church have and still do teach those things, however.

g e n e r a l k e n o b i

Extremely honored to be compared to obiwan

@@ianforsyth7804 anytime bro

Feed da Troll no. It’s not accurate. And if it’s 50 years old, that’s remarkable! Because they’ve accurately predicted hairstyles from the early ‘90’s! It’s got a few points of half-truth, but it’s depicted in an untruthful manner. Also, every general conference talk from back then is available on LDS.org, so...I’m calling bull crap on all your claims. But I’m glad this is how you’re spending your time. Trying to destroy people’s beliefs? I hope that this makes you happy!

smith went out shooting whilst in prison for legitimate crimes. not a martyr.

hayd soren destruction of property was the main one however he created his own currency and sold fake bonds.

hayd soren you fucking idiot this is taught in sunday school he destroyed a printing press

@hayd soren hayla is really mad she said this was taught on every Sunday . So Joseph kicked a printing press down. She even have to swear about🤬

Best comment so far.

Both of these are not official Church doctrine

L

Sounds more like an offshoot of Mormons that disobeyed the original Church. Mormons who believe in Prejudice are not ordinary Mormons, Jews who believe in Christ are not ordinary Jews, Christians who believe in Purgatory are not ordinary Christians. Religious Schisms and Theological Revolutions are not exclusively associated with Mormons. Look at the entire history of Christianity: Christians originally began as Messianic Jews but eventually became Catholics, Orthodoxists, and Protestants.

These young guys mocking an old video not even realizing the history of their own church.

This documentary was made by an evangelical who really disliked the church. I watched the full thing. It featured some church critics who refused to join the sequel he did because the first was just a hatchet-job and had so many lies/inaccuracies.

They should react to Christian Metal bands like Stryper.

This film was actually made by members of the Church at the time.

Then they should read the real testament, which is called....The Silmarillion.

@@rickrichards166 Source pleeze that they were current members.

@@warioman91 - I agree that Jesus was not a blue eyed blonde. Its improbable in the extreme. It's an artistic representation. However, not a single person on this planet has the exact same identical beliefs. Regardless of your religion, you have your own thoughts and interpretations. I'm a Catholic and I don't refer to Jesus as Catholic Jesus. I've never heard him referred to as Baptist, or Lutheran Jesus. Why? Its because Jesus isnt a proprietary concept.

not in fucking america at that time lmao

Yeah because with how big that book was he was able to pick it up and run with it

OMGosh so true!

Its from the Godmakers

I do

While it may seem disrespectful to you. You believe a different form of Jesus than Christians.

Slidingheart82 because we don’t believe in the trinity but believe that they are three separate distinct beings but one in purpose. We read the Bible just like every other Christian religion

There is archeological evidence of battles between ancient natives, so I am not sure what your point is. DNA failed to prove a connection, which is not the same things as proving there isn't one. There are plenty examples of smaller groups DNA getting swallowed up by a larger group. Lastly, we do not have Smith's interpretation of any hieroglyphs. At most one can say that the eleven fragments we have do not match the text of the Book of Abraham. Since records indicate two scrolls, one over 60 feet long, and enough fragments to cover a kitchen table, enough evidence has not been recovered to conclusively state anything.

in humid central america nothing organic would last over 100 years in wooded forest DNA human lymphocyte antigens HLA B21 of top 12 areas in the world 8 were arab areas 3 were in central america that spoke the UTO-ASTECAN family of languages 1 tribe was # 4 on the list beating out several arab countries different Egyptologist have different opinions Joseph Smith was the first person in modern times to say that the hieroglyph of boat was about the number 1000 ask an REAL Egyptologist

_Correct!_

Very true, I realized the same thing. I wouldn’t doubt that all of the material from this video is based on something said by church leaders or members. Except there’s always been a difference between opinions or ideas expressed by church leaders and official church doctrine. A good example is the argument between James E. Talmage and Joseph Fielding Smith about whether or not there was death before the fall of Adam. They both had opinions and made statements but the church didn’t have established doctrine until James E Talmage delivered “The Earth and Man” which the church took as its official position. Just things to consider.

Can you give an example about the official doctrine of the church that was showned in the video? And can you also give the specific source of information?

@tomyourmom I just listed one, is that not enough? I can certainly do more but it's been a long time since I made this comment I'd have to re-watch their entire erroneous video

Where in the doctrines and what versus are you talking about?

Brother, I know it's hard to give us something you've had in your life for so long. But it's not true.

@@nathanbigler The LDS Church does not consider something Doctrine because someone who later became a General Authority said it when they were younger. Many other GA's explicitly disagree with many of those speculations. Taking a quote out of context does not doctrine make. Only the Prophet is called to receive new revelation, and then only after being ordained prophet. Changes to policy and the understanding of Doctrine require all 15 called as prophets, seers, and revelators to unanimously agree.

Deception and lying is there anything else Mormon pass off as apologetics? According to revelations of Mormon prophets you god was a polygamist. THAT IS WHAT WAS TAUGHT AS DOCTRINE! Do not lie. You said you did not want Christians to like and you just lied. Notably Brigham Young, John Taylor, Joseph F. Smith taught that as doctrine. It is in the Journal of Discourses. Why are you lying? While you are at it, why tell us that the Joseph Smith thought people lived on the moon and Brigham thought that people lived on the sun ... Now that is real funny, not like the contrived laughter Celestial intercourse - I think they mean intercourse in heaven which causes spirit babies. That is what they seem to mean. HE WAS AN ANGEL??? Is Kwaku making up p00p. No he was a spirit child not an angel. How did Moroni become an angel??? He was not married and went to the celestial kingdom! Kwaku is one of the worst and make up bull. You can never rely on the 3 Mormons to just provide the truth about anything. Lie lie lie. There was a council of gods who heard the plans of salvation. There is nothing about a vote. So to say there was not vote is an error. THAT IS AN OPINION. Many mormons believe there was a vote but I do not believe there is anything specific about that particular aspect. However, just because it was in that video, and you want to find something to disagree with, you chose it. If a Mormon has said that you would have been ok with it. This is deception. Ok the one about black skin is not true. But you guys gaslighted it immediately. You said that even Lucifer was the child of god. They NEVER SAID THAT BLACKS WERE THE CHILD OF SATAN. However, you did not even mention the curse of Cain and the curse of cain which mormons teach as doctrine which is not taught anymore but remains doctrine. Again you were deceiving everyone here. Stop making stupid faces. Yes, the most valiant in the battle were destined to be born to Mormon families. This was from the Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual chapter 6 in the 1970s!!! Please please stop making stupid faces please. Adam god is not fold lore. Again Mormons lie. This was taught as doctrine by Joseph Smith to Brigham Young as a secret doctrine (like polygamy) and Brigham Young canonized it! It was in the D&C! Spencer Kimball abrogated it in 1976. It was doctrine. You know well before what that part was about but you contrived confusion. Again deception Jesus was not begotten by the spirit that is again false. here is what your prophets say in that regard... Brigham young “Now Remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. … When the Virgin Mary conceived the Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost… What a learned idea' Jesus, our elder brother was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in heaven. Joseph F. Smith _"The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended with any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit” _ Mormons lie and lie. Can you guys ever give us the truth about anything??? Stop rolling your eyes. This was taught at the general conference in 1858 “How was it with Mary and Martha, and other women that followed him (Mormon Jesus)? In old times, and it is common in this day, the women, even as Sarah, called their husbands Lord; the word Lord is tantamount to husband in some languages, master, lord, husband, are about synonymous… When Mary of old came to the sepulchre on the first day of the week, instead of finding Jesus she saw two angels in white, ‘And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou?’ She said unto them,’ Because they have taken away my Lord,’ or husband, ‘and I know not where they have laid him.’ And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.’ Is there not here manifested the affections of a wife. These words speak the kindred ties and sympathies that are common to that relation of husband and wife” (Journal of Discourses 2:81). Also it was taught by President Woodruff, Apostle Pratt, Joseph F. Smith. IT IS IN THE Journal of Discourses! You are liars.

@@hightemporalcoadjutor2396 I'm sorry that the difference between doctrine and interpretation of scripture gets so mixed up. I don't think it's necessary to go over everything point you brought up. It is sufficient to say that there is a reason why conference talks (and sources such as the Journal of Discources) are not canonized. They are interpretations of scriptures (in other words, opinions) Some are true. Some are not. If you read some of the comments in this comment section, this point has already been brought up. A reliable source of our doctrine can be found in the standard works (Holy Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price), Official Proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Those are doctrine. To summarize my point and those that have posted before me, if you take everything that is said by a prophet or leader of the church as doctrine, then your perspective makes sense and you have a valid argument. However, all of the aforementioned leaders are mortal beings and prone to mistakes. Some said some pretty dumb and insensitive things. But those are opinions (interpretations of scripture, not doctrine). As for the comments in this video: this is just a reaction video to the "banned Mormon cartoon," not a rebuttal. They have many other videos on this channel that dig into specifics, and I think they assume that most of their audience has seen a video or two before watching this one. But again, that is merely my opinion (or interpretation) of this video. I will say that I am impressed by the amount of information you have gathered about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I merely suggest that you differentiate what is doctrine and what is merely opinion. Thank you for your thoughtful post! I hope this explanation makes sense.

@@michaelanderson6484 A+👍

@@hightemporalcoadjutor2396 You do understand the difference between speculation and doctrine, don't you?

​@@michaelanderson6484 Lol let me summarize for you. All the bad things that have been taught in the LDS church are just the opinions of men. All the good things in the LDS church are direct revelations from God recorded in doctrine and scripture. See it's easy if you don't use critical thinking to understand LDS doctrine! Doctrine = Good things the Prophet said. Opinions=Bad things the Prophet said. This is the type of thinking that results from being in a cult.

Mormons constantly say mutually-exclusive things in proximity & keep smiling that brainwashed smile. Dum-dum-dum-dum-dum

So, when will YOU visit Kolob?

I laughed too, especially since in the early 90's this cartoon was shown in Mormon churches here in the South. And now when I show it to present day Mormon's they're surprised by the contents.

@@theiran I am surprised to hear that. Since it was an evangelical production, part of a larger explicitly anti-LDS movie called "The Godmakers".

WTF history are you talking about? Y'all believe Native Americans are Jews

Linda Smith, we accept scripture (The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine & Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price, and the Bible) as doctrine. We respect and listen to the words of prophets with reverence, but we also prayerfully take what prophets and apostles say (or have said), and we challenge them with revealed and true core doctrine, and go from there. Actual true core doctrine of the church is pretty exclusive to things that are eternal and that never change. The only way official core doctrine is established in the church is through a vigorous process. Each word of something that becomes core “doctrine” has to be first approved by “the brethren” of the church, meaning the prophet, his counselors, and the twelve apostles...15 different men...not an easy feat. Here’s a great article on the topic... www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

So aside from the standard works is there a list of approved doctrine somewhere? How do members know what is doctrine vs what is just policy or the opinion of one apostle, or even a prophet, that should not carry the same weight as doctrine?

Wildflowers and Freckes, I did a closer reading of the article you shared and I see it now. Scriptures, Articles of Faith, official declarations and proclamations. So there's Declaration 1, Declaration 2, Monson's Easter Declaration, the 1980 Sesquicentennial Declaration, the 2000 Relief Society Declaration and the 1990 Proclamation on the Family. Everything else is opinion. Am I missing anything?

@Linda Smith, so unless something new that has come out is approved by all 15 of the brethren, it is not considered core doctrine. That's how you can know. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't respect and honor what the leaders of our church are saying, that's just saying that anything new that is presented isn't necessarily core doctrine unless it fits this criteria. And like I said before, you can prayerfully challenge what any leader of the church says with already revealed core doctrine to make sure the two align. Now, I do need to stress here that I believe that prophets are guided and directed by God. Policy changes have and will continue to happen often throughout the church's history based on a lot of things including our current circumstances, and that's something different entirely. But we can rest assured that any eternal doctrine is here to stay, and will never change. As far as a list goes...I found this www.lds.org/manual/basic-doctrines/basic-doctrines?lang=eng I hope it helps.

Feed da Troll, sure, here are some references... “With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications.” www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine “The prophet and President of the Church can receive revelation individually that becomes doctrine when it is sustained by the united voice of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles” www.lds.org/ensign/2013/09/how-is-doctrine-established?lang=eng Though the priesthood being withheld from the blacks was never core doctrine of the church, nor is anything that is abrogated, (since core doctrine is only eternal doctrine that will never change which is the topic of this comment thread), here’s this for your information anyway... “In early June of this year, the First Presidency announced that a revelation had been received by President Spencer W. Kimball extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the Church. President Kimball has asked that I advise the conference that after he had received this revelation, which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the sacred rooms of the holy temple, he presented it to his counselors, who accepted it and approved it. It was then presented to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who unanimously approved it, and was subsequently presented to all other General Authorities, who likewise approved it unanimously.” www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/2?lang=eng And as far as President Nelson stating that there’s more to come...I direct you to The 9th Article of Faith... 9 We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. And if you still think that’s complete “bullocks” based on what other prophets and apostles have said in the past about the church being fully restored, I refer you again to the references above.

So, the long and short of it, God set forth a plan that the Earth would be made so that we would be able to receive bodies and do the works necessary for salvation and exaltation, so while discussing this plan, Lucifer told God to send Lucifer, and we wouldn't have any agency, he would just force us to do everything and the glory would be Lucifer, but Christ told God to send Christ, and those who would believe upon God would be saved and the glory would be our Heavenly Father's, and so God sent Jesus. Lucifer was furious and tried to rebel against God, just like how in Isaiah he talks about Satan was cast down and lost his first estate, his eternal glory because he sought to rebel against God and 1/3 of the Heavenly host fell with him. So, it isn't that Jesus wanted us to sin, it's that Jesus and God wanted us to be able to choose and to be able to come back to them in faith, but we each are able to make those choices because would God be just if He took away our free will?

I was gonna comment that! You totally beat me to it.😂 I'll comment anyway.😂

hey, that's my name too!

They are mostly funded by volunteer donations.

Anni Kalapudas, I found my favorite answer to this question in “The Cultural Evolution Inside of Mormonism” by Greg Trimble in the chapter “Peeling Back Polygamy”. He doesn’t speak on behalf of the church, but he uses church doctrine to tackle this tough topic and helped me see what I believe to be the truth. You should definitely read it some time. But until then, I’ll try to give you a small snippet of what it says... In the Book of Mormon, Jacob 2:23-24, the Lord calls polygamy an abomination. Yet in the Bible, 2 Samuel 12:8 and 1 Kings 15:5, he was endorsing it for David. Instead of being a contradiction between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, I think it shows that there are times when God allows, even commands the practice of polygamy for his own wise purposes. This could be compared to other commandments we’ve been given that God sometimes allows to be broken, such as the commandment to not kill (Exodus 20:13). There are many instances in scripture where he commanded people to break that law...Israel was commanded to go after the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15:3), Nephi was commanded to kill Laban (1 Nephi 4:10), and though an angel stopped him before he actually had to do it...Abraham was commanded to kill Isaac. Also Adam and Eve were commanded not to partake of the fruit, but God knew very well they’d have to break that commandment in order to move forward with the plan of salvation. It was a sacrifice Adam and Eve had to take...a sacrifice all these people had to take that were commanded to do something they had previously been commanded not to do. I love what Greg says at this point... “As we go back into D&C 132, in verse 50 the Lord tells Joseph Smith that He’s seen his ‘sacrifices and obedience to that which’ He had commanded him in reference to plural marriage. ‘Therefore,’ says the Lord, ‘I make a way for your escape, as I accepted the offering of Abraham of his son Isaac.’ Why does the Lord use the word ‘escape’ here? That means that the sacrifice that is being required of Joseph Smith will come to an end. If the Lord is calling a plural marriage an ‘Abrahamic sacrifice,’ then it will bring comfort to someone who has been required to live the law of plural marriage to know the final attribute of an Abrahamic sacrifice is the eventual release-or an ‘escape,’ as the Lord put it. If plural marriage is a painful sacrifice for all of the good parties involved, then why would the Lord require it to continue in the celestial kingdom? Why would God condemn the practice of plural marriage so strongly, even calling it ‘abominable,’ if it was in fact a celestial law? Because based on these scriptures, the ‘sacrifice’ is eventually brought to an end so that happiness can be restored as it was with Abraham.” There are many reasons God has asked for the sacrifice of polygamy at times in this life, but as Greg put it, and to answer your question... “I believe in my heart that polygamy is a temporal exception to the general and eternal law of monogamy. This exception was in play in the Old Testament and in the early days of the LDS Church. It was a sacrifice to those involved, and in relation to the Abrahamic sacrifice, those involved will be offered an ‘escape’ from it if they so desire.” Now whether or not men can be married to more than one woman in the celestial kingdom, I don’t know for sure. Greg suggests, and I agree with him, that maybe it will be allowed that those who were sealed together as man and wife in this life in a polygamous marriage, will have the option to stay together if they so desire, but it is absolutely not required, and is definitely an exception, not the rule. There’s so much more to that chapter in his book that I just love. And he absolutely ties it in with scripture and other doctrine. You should definitely take a look. Anyway, I hope that helps. :-)

@@wildflowersandfreckles Thank you very much - your answer really gave me some peace!

@@fayelewis5476 Idk what your doing in this comment section then but go off I guess

Anni Kalapudas, you’re very welcome! I’m glad it helped. :-)

Angelica Hollingsworth the Book of Mormon

It's pretty accurate in terms of Mormon church history. Black people weren't even allowed to enter into the priesthood until the 1970s. The US government threatened to take away their tax exempt status and all of a sudden, bam...the Mormon prophet had a magical revelation that black people could, in fact, be treated just the same as anyone else. Wow. What a blessing indeed 👍😅 Hitting that hip pocket nerve...it will usually change most peoples' minds. If they had any integrity or any semblance of honor, they would've stuck with their beliefs and let the chips fall where they may buuut nope, they flipped them immediately.

Yes XD

More Mormon pronouns. Mormons DO and DID believe this stuff. Mormons so sneaky & deceptive to potential converts.

Someone could've said the same thing 100 years ago. Their ever-changing what previous "prophets" decreed. In less than 200 years, there have been over 100,000 changes to the Book of Mormon.

@@catholicdad Which translates in 100% Bs.

They do that to make it more palatable and “IN”.

Of course, proselytizing is like advertising so you gotta be "woke" and alter the unsavory bits to make it more palatable for this generation...

We don't discredit the prophets who said wrong things, we just acknowledge they were wrong. We believe in continuing revelation. It is up to each individual to receive revelation from God about the truth of a matter. It is the prophet's responsibility to seek God's will constantly so he cannot speak incorrect things, but he has to want to receive an answer just like any other person. Brigham Young did not seek revelation to change the policy he pronounced on the Church in those early years. To avoid something like that happening in the present, all 15 men in the two presiding counsels of the Church must agree on a policy or revelation. President Nelson can declare the mind of the Lord to the Church and the world, along with people he authorizes to speak for him. The buck stops with the prophet, who will answer to God for how he handles His Church and how he sought after revelation to guide His Church.

“Banned Mormon Cartoon” video clip originally appeared as part of the film "The Godmakers," which is 56 minutes long, produced by Jeremiah Films. Ed Decker and Dick Baer, two ex-Mormons made the film in 1982. In 2003 this clip was included in the DVD, “The Secret World of Mormonism” also produced by Jeremiah Films, which run 45 minutes. “The Secret World of Mormonism,” is a more comprehensive documentary covering the history, doctrine, and teachings of Mormonism.

“Banned Mormon Cartoon” video clip is an accurate depiction of what Mormon false prophets and Mormon so-called apostles have preached and taught as the deep trues of Mormonism and have been bragging about as their so-called restored gospel over the last 190 some years. These Mormon not so wonderful esoteric teachings are easy found in Mormon writing, books and official Mormon Church manuals and publications.

Congratulations bro!

I’m sorry to hear that

They didn’t debunk any thing

Individual members often get things mixed up. I would recommend a trained historian. Dan Vogel is great at getting Mormon information straight. His videos are fantastic, accurate sources of information on Mormon origins and early Mormon history.

The best way to find out is to read this book that's called....The Silmarillion. Any comments?

Sometimes people don't know who to ask, what to say, or where to find answers to their questions; and they'll take what they can get, even if they only hear lies. but I think the previous comments have some true Merits.

Alannah May... : *Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints*

Queen Bizzle, I applaud your candor, and thank you kindly.

@@feeddatroll2522 Oh, keep being you. It's precious.

@@feeddatroll2522 "Mormo sources" does not mean what you think it means. There is a difference between opinions which are found in "Mormon sources" and doctrine, which are found in the scriptures. =============== Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted. www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

@@korvaamiko66 >> apostle Paul 1Cor.14[34] Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. [35] And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 2 Peter 3 [16] As also in all his [Paul] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. James 2 [19] Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. [14] What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? [20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead [24] Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

@@korvaamiko66 >> on par with them during conference talks Conference talks are not canonized

@@korvaamiko66 These are the principles which guide me ====>>> If the Conference Talk is grounded in scripture, then it is an expansion/ interpretation of those scriptures. 2 Peter 1 [20] Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Otherwise it should be seriously considered as being inspired and not lightly discarded.

Then I suggest you check out the South Park episode "All About Mormons."

It's worse than you thought... 1978

That is a disproven urban legend. Freedom of information act filings as well as research at the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library have uncovered no evidence of any such threat. The fact that the KKK remains a tax exempt church even today shows just how silly the idea is. The NAACP did sue BYU in the late 60s, but that case was dismissed. The NAACP erroneously believed BYU did not admit any African-American students, even though in 1968 BYU had a higher percentage than either Harvard or Princeton. BYU also had more African-American TA's and lectures. The first Black student graduated in the 1930s. The 1968 football team did not have any Black athletes, which was perhaps the most obvious problem. That was corrected by 1970, the year the first Black professor made tenure. Which was a far more common problem at many predominately White universities throughout America.

I guess Smith really outdid himself then. 🤣

They link to them in the description.

Was taught this as a LDS child… “be proud that you are lamanite you’re Mormon so you are better!”

b h hhahahahahha yesssssss. Honestly, I think the movie is hilarious.

I agree that our works amount to little compared to what God and Jesus do, but they are necessary signs of our faith in Christ. We show the world that we are disciples of Jesus by the works we do: healing the sick, raising the dead, caring for the poor and needy, raising a family, etc.

@@nathanbigler But LDS definitely still follow Joseph Smith? I lived in Logan UT the past two years and that's still who everyone talked about, as well as Bringham Young. But still, the more racist one.. yikes!

@@faithhunt6114 Well since Joseph was very non-racist, especially for the time and place in which he lived, being more racist isn't hard. Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restoration. I am unaware of him having taught that Jesus had Plural wives, but Parley P Pratt certainly suspected that. Many Apostles have had differing views on the marital status of Jesus, with no official declaration on the subject ever being made. The FLDS reject the Revelation ending the practice of Plural Marriage.

Hope you understand the word sacred. If you want to know the ordinances try to go inside the temple.

@@shigatsukousie9658 I’ve visited the Italian temple

@@anonymouscommenter6829 yes before the dedication. The temple in Rome is quite luxurious

You are quoting an inter hoax that claims to be an Official First Presidency Statement, but the only two statements on race were made in 1907 and 1968.

​@@brettmajeske3525and what about 1978... when black folk were FINALLY "allowed" temple endowments and sealings?

@@CaptPeon ​ @CaptPeon The 1978 revelation didn't comment on the nature of race relations, beyond noting that the blessings of the priesthood would be made available to all based only on worthiness. The 1907 and 1968 statements are the only official commentary on race relations during the period of the restriction. The so called 1951 First Presidency Statement is an internet hoax, no such official publication was made in 1951, nor 1947, or any of the other alleged dates given to the hoax.

You could still watch it...It's all over YT

They literally don’t say anything is untrue they just say it’s exaggerated but the concept is the same it is a pagan

@@covfefe1787 THANK YOU!!!! Yeah it may be exaggerated but the truth lies underneath. It’s there. To deny or laugh at things that they actually believe in doctrinally is really funny to me. If it is your true doctrine don’t act like it’s not what you believe in because it is! You believe that Jesus Is the brother of Satan. You believe that You can become gods one day. Etc. PLEEEEEEASE! People do your research! I don’t intend to bash any religion but the facts are there! Open your eyes! Follow the true Jesus of the Bible, not the Jesus of Mormonism. Yeah I said it. The Jesus of Mormonism. It’s an entirely different Jesus! (I’m talking to the saints unscripted guys here) Again I don’t intend to be rude but I get so upset when I see that the originally Jesus isn’t being followed and I have to speak truth.

@@healthhollow7218 np

The video is probably 90% true!!

Yup!

Well The Book of Mormon was only fabricated less than 200 years ago lmao

There are elements of LDS belief contained in the cartoon, twisted and distorted, mixed with 19th century Protestant traditions and folk tales. The LDS Doctrine of Eternal Progression does not go into detail about Heavenly Father's life before the creation of the Universe. He is our Father and our God, whom we worship in the name of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Ghost. We do believe that we can become co-heirs with Christ by the power of the Atonement, but again we do not have extensive details in our Scriptures of what that mean entirely. We do not teach Heavenly Father has hundreds of spirit wives. We do teach of a pre-mortal existence in which Lucifer rebelled against the plan Heavenly Father presented (the cartoon implies the plan was Jesus's). We believe the Arch-Angel Michael, not God, became Adam. We do teach Mary was carried away by the spirit as is stated in the Bible. I could go on. For every sliver of true LDS belief, there are a dozen lies and twistings.

They are “lying for the Lord”. It’s an LDS thing.

Mormons dum-dum-dum-dum-dum

Everything Joseph smith said was false, he was a leader of a cult and exalted himself above Jesus so that he could steal the wives of other members and marry children just like all good cult leaders do today 🤷🏻‍♀️

Dude I love you

@Tyler Danley, no matter how much they try to discredit that cartoon, the LDS church DOES believe in and teach most of the doctrines & beliefs that are in the cartoon. They just HIDE those beliefs from non-Mormons, and they don’t even tell new Mormons about those hidden beliefs, until they rise higher in the ranks of this cult known as the Latter Day Saints.

I'm an older Mormon and although these youngsters we're not taught this I was definitely taught this in my younger days. I was a Mormon for 40 years. All of this was taught decades ago. As time goes on they have changed things. It is rumored that the nephites being termed "white and delightsome" in the book of Mormon was removed. I do not have a current book of Mormon but in the original which I had several of did indeed have the words white and delightsome referring to the nephites . It also says in the book of Mormon that the lamanites skin turned dark because of their wickedness. Nephi being the good brother was white and one of his brothers lamen being the bad brother as darker skinned. The plural marriage thing in the celestial kingdom will be practiced or you aren't welcome there if you don't practice it. That is in the doctrine and covenants. Look it up. The Cain doctrine was definitely taught when I was a young child..in the Cain doctrine it says that everyone born from Cain's line were the Spirits that were neutral in the spirit world before their birth and that's why they are cursed with black skin and was born from cain and in down the line also because Cain was cursed because he killed his brother able. I can't believe I used to believe this nonsense. I was brainwashed as a child. I woke up when I was 40 years old and it was the most freezing experience ever. I don't need a man to tell me I'm worthy on a piece of paper. Only Jesus can deem me worthy.

Hi there! You seem like a person who likes to listen to different types of Christian denominations Apologist talk. If you're interested in Catholicism, I recommend listening to CatholicAnswers on the radio, live on RU-vid, Facebook, and I also think they have a podcast! You might learn something new! My favorite apologists are Trent Horn and Tim Staples. They have pretty good debates on RU-vid. Anyways, God bless!