This isn’t an attack on Mormons, it’s an examination of Mormon teachings. When you apply basic philosophical logic, the problems become impossible to ignore.
In this video, Gary Michael Voris walks through the three big issues at the center of Mormonism: the philosophical contradiction at the heart of the “Great Apostasy” claim, the theological error in promising believers they will become gods (and why that promise dates back to the serpent in Genesis), and the doctrinal impossibility of calling Nicene Christianity a corruption when the Council of Nicaea simply affirmed what Scripture already taught.
If Jesus promised the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church, and the Church fell into apostasy 300 years later — someone is wrong. Either Christ was wrong, or Mormonism is.
Excellent. You said what I would have liked to tell them all along, and it’s because of their dishonesty, lack of intellectual integrity, and disingenuous actions (like sitting on a book of Mormon and leaving it behind as a way of getting it into my hands which I returned to them) that get’s them into disfavor among honest people in the community. Their dishonesty with the community is OK with them at times because for them it’s like Wall Street investment scams. They lack a conscience which would inform them, if it were rightly formed, that it’s not OK to lie in order to attract people into their cult. They’re arrogant in that they, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, are purely transactional, if they cannot get you into their cult they are going to have no use for you except to report to their superiors that they tried. They suppose that others are ignorant simply because they can fool some of the people some of the time and they use others ignorance to their advantage. Are they prone to practice acts of mercy or kindness when you are in need of help in a remote place stuck in a motorhome north of the Grand Canyon? Probably very likely, yes, they can do that, as they did, render assistance, and without pay, but does that make them Christian? No, as having an attribute of a Christian, as we recall in the third luminous mystery is one thing, but being a Christian, as we define it theologically is quite another. You can have good manners, wear a white shirt and tie, sing beautifully, go to religious services, read the Bible, abstain from fornication and profanity, work without laziness, give to those in need of assistance, and generally respect the laws of civil society, but in the end, you can be so far from Christianity theologically, as they are, as to miss it altogether. And this is where discussion with them, and Jehovah Witnesses, goes nowhere with them. They lack an intellectual basis to respond to anything about the trinity except to tell you the programmed response, “that word is not in the bible”. You got it, Michael, saying what needed to be said. How many times have I heard, you can catch more bees with honey than vinegar? Enough, but you are not catching bees. You are shepherding souls, and defending the deposit of faith. And you said what needs to be said, which is not always pleasant to hear. And I have said this before, when in the first five minutes of conversation I know someone has lied to me wittingly, that person is not worth doing business with, not now, not tomorrow, not a week from now, not a month from now.