Christian. ✝️ Conservative. Culinarian. Unapologetic. Christ is King. No unsolicited DM's. Can be sarcastic. Fan of Japanese culture and law stuff. Go Chiefs!

New Mexico
Joined April 2012
To ex-Mormons, former LDS, etc. who left to come to the real Jesus, let me ask you for your experiences. What was it that finally got you away from the delusions and into the truth of Scripture? I want to be loving, but firm. I want to be compassionate, but uncompromising. I'd love to hear your experiences on how the genuine gospel resonated with you and turned you away from the counterfeit that Mormonism puts out there. I want to find ways of reaching the lost who don't know Him. #exmormon #LDS #Mormons #Mormonism
Repenting means to reject what is false and put your faith into what is true. The Greek word for repent is metanoia, which literally means to "change one's mind." I would ask that you change your mind from what you currently believe to believe what is true. I know that is no small task, but I'm dead serious about it. Let me put it to you this way, do you agree that Jesus said there would be false Christs to come? And if a person were to believe in a false Christ, what would it mean for that person who believes in that false Christ? And if somebody were to point out to that person that they are following a false Christ, how should they respond? To be more blunt: If you were following a false Christ, wouldn't you want to know? Wouldn't you want somebody who cares enough about your very soul to come and say something? I know you don't believe me. I know that you don't know me and that I don't know you. Maybe you feel that "it's not my place" to point it out. But man, this is eternity on the line. So how can I possibly remain silent in light of that? I don't care what you think of me. I don't care what it costs me. I just want you to be in the truth, and I'm telling you that Mormonism isn't it. I'm not here to belittle you. I'm not here to insult you. But I am challenging you. I want to be more loving and to be more kind, but what I cannot do is compromise the Word of God in order to get there. So then, tell me, how do you want to be approached if you are the one in the wrong? I'm serious here. We all face moments in our lives where we are wrong about something. Nobody is immune from that. So what does it take in a situation where you are wrong about something to have you take a step back instead of digging in?
13
2
23
6,078
Cults are all about their leader, not Jesus. Any view of Jesus must be viewed through the lens of the cult leader. For Islam, that means your view of Jesus must come through Muhammed. Only his interpretations are correct. Only he has the real truth. For LDS, that means your view of Jesus must come through Joseph Smith. Only his interpretations are correct. Only he has the real truth. Never mind that both claim that an angel sent by God was involved in the process of their sacred "scripture", as it were. Oh, and both were polygamists, and liked 'em young, apparently. Things that make you go hmm...
64
4
4
35
7,730
To LDS: If Joseph Smith was a false prophet, then the Book of Mormon isn't reliable and cannot be used to test Joseph Smith. After all, if a false prophet gives you a ruler, it doesn't mean the measurements are correct. Instead, looking at the Bible only, tell me one thing that a false prophet would not do. Jesus already warned there would be false christs and false prophets, so a false prophet will make himself will claim Christ. And even Satan can quote Scripture. So tell me, how can you tell what is and isn't a false prophet just by using the Bible alone? We know it can't be the burning in the bosom. On the road to Emmaus, the two disciples Jesus encountered were sad and disappointed because they believed some wrong things about Jesus. They thought Jesus was going to topple Roman rule and establish the earthly kingdom. Jesus goes through the Scriptures with them, they continue walking. They stop and break bread, then they realize it was Him, and Jesus immediately disappears. They didn't believe, now they did. Only did then they realize that they had experienced the burning in their bosom, that fire that drove them. It wasn't a test to see if something was true. It was something they realized after they believed. More importantly, this was while in the very presence of the resurrected Jesus. You can't even replicate that experience, so... not a test. So, if a false prophet will claim christ, what are you using to measure Joseph Smith? Are you using Joseph Smith's ruler, or are you using the Bible? And what would a false prophet not do that Joseph Smith did?
50
2
4
20
3,475
Mormons aren't Christians. When you look at the Book of Mormon, it looks innocuous at first. But remember a few things: First, their whole "Scripture" doesn't just include the Book of Mormon. It also includes Pearl of a Great Price - which includes the discredited Book of Abraham - and Doctrines and Covenants, which contain many of Joseph Smith's failed prophesies. Given the narrative, the Book of Mormon should match up with Jewish theology. But it doesn't. Joseph Smith as a prophet should also match up as being a biblical prophet. He does not. More importantly, the whole of LDS Scripture I mentioned above, the BOM, Pearl of a Great Price, and D&C should match up with what has been found historically. They do not. Most importantly, the Jesus presented should be the same Jesus as found in the Bible. But is He? No, He is not. The more you look into it, the more obvious the mismatch. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints wears Christianity like a skinsuit. It's superficial. Go beneath the surface and look at it critically, and it all falls apart. Further, I've spent time in prayer over the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, inquiring to God if it is true. The Holy Sprit has testified to me that it is false, and has led me back to Scripture where warnings were given about false prophets and false Christs were promised. Whatever LDS are listening to, it's not the Holy Spirit. To prevent bias, I ran some critical questions through Grok, which did pull from LDS sources. And while this only begins to scratch the surface, one inevitable conclusion is true here. Mormonism is false and the Mormon Jesus is a counterfeit. That's a path to destruction. God does not delight in lies. Link in the comments.
73
6
2
44
3,104
Here is the link to the @grok project that critically looks at Joseph Smith and does a comparison. Whatever LDS is, it's not biblical Christianity. grok.com/project/0c91c414-8d…
2
4
290
Agreed. To LDS who claim to follow the same Jesus: If only that were so. You need to see Jesus as He IS, not what Mormons claim Him to be. Jesus warned there would be false prophets and false Christs. Matthew 24:24-26 ESV For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. Joseph Smith's claim of his first vision in seeing Jesus? In the wilderness, by his own hand, written in 1832. Satan's fall in Isaiah 14:13-15 and Mormon's claim of exaltation follow the same model. This isn't a coincidence. There's biblical "theosis" and then there's the promised from Mormonism which corrupts it. The Pharisees sought to stone Jesus because of his claim of divinity - to be God in the flesh. If all men were to be "God" in the spiritual sense as spiritual children, then the equal status is already in place. There would be right to be adoption as children of God because we would already be there. There would have been no need for the cross. There would be no reason for Jesus to take on sin. Moreover, LDS rejects original sin, even though the Bible affirms it. Sin entered to the world through Adam and through it, many are made sinners (Romans 5:12-19) If you can't understand your sin nature, how can you repent of it? How can you submit to Jesus Christ if you see yourself falsely? Mormonism calls the "fall" good because it's the plan for exaltation. It calls the rebellion, which was evil - good. But God makes it clear. "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" — Isaiah 5:20 Biblically, LDS theology claims evil is good, seeks exaltation in the same way Lucifer did, and presents a false Christ found in the wilderness. Look at the demands of the Mormonism church, the baptism, the ordinances, the temple - then look at what the Bible calls us to do. Romans 10:9-10 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. And that's the critical part here. If Jesus is just some "spirit brother" to the rest of humanity, then he isn't Lord. To claim he's a spirit brother is to make yourself equal to Him, not to submit to Him. You cannot both hold to Latter Day Saint theology and also be saved. They are not compatible. To be saved means to do the hard thing. To turn from what you believe and to repent - to change your mind from where you are, and to believe in Him. But that also means leaving Mormonism behind. It's not easy, but this is about your eternal soul.
Mormons are not Christians. They're blasphemers of God. Roman Catholics are mixed bag but hard to say Christian with a clean conscience.
1
1
6
238
The replies in this thread and calling it absurd and ridiculous is ironic given that it's claims are no better or worse than LDS thelogy in the first place. LDS won't even self-reflect on how plural marriage and Joseph Smith making things after inventing the Book of Mormon is really on the same level as what they are complaining about.
I don’t know how many need to hear this but “soul contracts” (i.e. abuser/abused agreed to that abuse before birth) are new age spirituality bullshit and the concept has no place in LDS theology.
2
124
LDS state that that the Holy Spirit continues to speak and reveal the truth. In part, I agree. What the Holy Spirit won't do, however, is contradict what is already laid out in Scripture. I have spent much time in prayer on whether or not Joseph Smith was a true prophet and if the Book of Mormon is true. I have done so sincerely. The Holy Spirit has revealed to me that Joseph Smith was a false prophet who preaches a counterfeit Jesus. He also revealed to me the Book of Mormon is a piece of fiction, and that because LDS see Jesus in a false light as a spirit brother to themselves, that Jesus also had to work out his own salvation, that they can't see Jesus as Lord - that because of this, they have never been born again, and don't have the Holy Spirit to guard them from the delusion. Rather, the Holy Spirit has taught me that LDS listen to false spirits entirely. #exmormon #lds #mormons
1
1
117
Even Satan quoted Scripture to Jesus during the temptation. So it is again with Mormonism, JW's and others. Islam has a Jesus who wasn't crucified. But any who are willing to look into the truth of these beyond any superficial similarity can see that none of these deal with the biblical Jesus.
We would be foolish to think Satan wouldn’t establish a counterfeit “church” on this earth and disguise it as Christian. We would be even more foolish to think he wouldn’t use the very name of Jesus Christ. We would be foolish to think he wouldn’t imitate Christ’s gospel, twisting the truth just enough to deceive as many as possible. We would be foolish to think he wouldn’t encourage good works, outward righteousness, and moral living to make deception more convincing. After all, even a counterfeit can look impressive on the outside! And perhaps most dangerously, we would be foolish to believe he wouldn’t distort the very meaning of the gospel, shifting our confidence away from Christ’s finished work and onto our own works, worthiness, and righteousness. The greatest deception isn’t always convincing people to reject Jesus. Sometimes, it’s convincing them that they’re following Him while trusting in something other than Him. “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.” 2 Corinthians 11:13–14
2
122
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you... the internet. We all know somebody like blue, sadly. But if somebody tells you that you are behaving like blue, please take notice. Never go full blue.
This is how I've felt this past week from my AI video:
1
219
New nightmare fuel unlocked.
The fisherman was playing hide the eel.
1
3
158
If you're going to claim to have been injured, maybe the photographs should actually show that? She's more like Amber Heard and less like Rihanna.
Tyreek hill’s estranged wife lakeeta hill got questioned about the pictures the police took of her after she told police that Tyreek put his hands on her “Look at me in those pictures I look beat down”
2
183
To LDS who claim to follow the same Jesus: If only that were so. You need to see Jesus as He IS, not what Mormons claim Him to be. Jesus warned there would be false prophets and false Christs. Matthew 24:24-26 ESV For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. Joseph Smith's claim of his first vision in seeing Jesus? In the wilderness, by his own hand, written in 1832. Satan's fall in Isaiah 14:13-15 and Mormon's claim of exaltation follow the same model. This isn't a coincidence. There's biblical "theosis" and then there's the promised from Mormonism which corrupts it. The Pharisees sought to stone Jesus because of his claim of divinity - to be God in the flesh. If all men were to be "God" in the spiritual sense as spiritual children, then the equal status is already in place. There would be right to be adoption as children of God because we would already be there. There would have been no need for the cross. There would be no reason for Jesus to take on sin. Moreover, LDS rejects original sin, even though the Bible affirms it. Sin entered to the world through Adam and through it, many are made sinners (Romans 5:12-19) If you can't understand your sin nature, how can you repent of it? How can you submit to Jesus Christ if you see yourself falsely? Mormonism calls the "fall" good because it's the plan for exaltation. It calls the rebellion, which was evil - good. But God makes it clear. "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" — Isaiah 5:20 Biblically, LDS theology claims evil is good, seeks exaltation in the same way Lucifer did, and presents a false Christ found in the wilderness. Look at the demands of the Mormonism church, the baptism, the ordinances, the temple - then look at what the Bible calls us to do. Romans 10:9-10 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. And that's the critical part here. If Jesus is just some "spirit brother" to the rest of humanity, then he isn't Lord. To claim he's a spirit brother is to make yourself equal to Him, not to submit to Him. You cannot both hold to Latter Day Saint theology and also be saved. They are not compatible. To be saved means to do the hard thing. To turn from what you believe and to repent - to change your mind from where you are, and to believe in Him. But that also means leaving Mormonism behind. It's not easy, but this is about your eternal soul.
2
145
Oh, he's got plans for her for sure.
Dexter is coming out of retirement for this one.
1
172
AI is getting too good at this.
Here's a never before seen outtake from Pulp Fiction....
1
177
For those looking into Mormonism or LDS, or latter day saints, (or whichever title they want to apply) I encourage you to look into the truth. When you look at the Book of Mormon, it looks innocuous at first. But remember a few things. Given the narrative, it should match up with Jewish theology. But it doesn't. Joseph Smith as a prophet should also match up as being a biblical prophet. He does not. More importantly, the whole of LDS Scripture includes Pearl of a Great Price and Doctrines and Covenants. If these were true, they should match up with what has been found historically. They do not. Most importantly, the Jesus presented should be the same Jesus as found in the Bible. But is He? No, He is not. The more you look into it, the more obvious the mismatch. To prevent bias, I ran some critical questions through Grok, which did pull from LDS sources. And while this only begins to scratch the surface, one inevitable conclusion is true here. Mormonism is false and the Mormon Jesus is a counterfeit. That's a path to destruction. God does not delight in lies. grok.com/project/0c91c414-8d…
87
14
7
72
7,221
Don't you know that Dihydrogen Monoxide can be toxic and used in the production of yoga mats? Maybe we should warn about that one too.
1
232
The Looney Tunes motion filed yesterday by Kevin "Shooter McGavin" Reddington to investigate Michael is not just an attack on Michael for being the courageous lone holdout juror. Reddington's motion is actually a full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution. Because if the new normal is that jurors are going to face brutal reprisals for disagreeing with a defense attorney, you can kiss the Sixth Amendment goodbye. To anyone who thinks that Reddington's motion is OK, just remember that the tables will inevitably turn. Imagine a similar trial sometime in the not too distant future where it is the reverse scenario: 11-1 in favor of guilty, with one holdout favoring not guilty by reason of insanity. I doubt you folks would be alright if the District Attorney then filed a motion to investigate that lone holdout standing in the way of a conviction. That's why this is actually not a partisan issue. Really, this is a "do we still want to have a Sixth Amendment" issue. If you are like me and believe steadfastly in the Constitution, it's easy to see how, regardless of your party affiliation, this is an absolutely terrible path of ruin Reddington wants to take us down. If we follow his destructive proposal to its logical conclusion, we're going to have an endless cycle of prosecutors investigating holdouts who oppose "guilty" and defense attorneys investigating holdouts who oppose "not guilty." Pretty soon we'll end up with with a retrograde justice system that will look a lot like the Hatfield-McCoy Feud: a cycle of carnage so malignant that its origins will fade in importance, replaced by the hopeless death spiral of the cycle itself. Kevin Reddington's disgusting motion to investigate Michael is worthy of nothing but universal condemnation. This is certainly not the final word from us on this subject, but merely our first words. It's all going to backfire spectacularly on sore loser Reddington.
373
1,241
84
5,606
123,442
Ron Duncan ✝️ retweeted
Replying to @RavenGrace0613
As we get closer to the trial, will this get better, or worse? Seems like she's getting more desperate, so who knows to what lengths she will go to stay relevant. Her follower count has already been reducing. People are catching on, or I hope
5
1
27
812
As I said, the internet rarely sends out its brightest and best. She decided to prove it via projection.
Says @MsTranceyPants who was anything but the rational person here. FYI, it's not in the "public record" as far as the court case goes. In fact, the judge made his own comment on the matter when giving instructions: Specifically, Judge Sullivan explained that while the burden of proof rests entirely on the prosecution, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt, for everything in the lives of human beings is open to some possible or imaginary doubt." He emphasized that a charge is proven beyond a reasonable doubt when, after analyzing all evidence, jurors hold an "abiding conviction to a moral certainty" that the charge is true. He further explicitly told the jury that establishing a mere strong probability of guilt is not enough to convict. The court record doesn't reflect that the juror himself ever used "reasonable" in front of "doubt" at all. Only the foreperson and others who have spoken have given their own interpretation of the matter. It may be that some people are just too slow to understand this. @grok, has the holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy case come forward to say he had reasonable doubt himself, or is this the interpretation or viewpoint from some of the jurors who have chosen to speak out on the case itself? Further, isn't it reasonable to call it speculation without the juror himself confirming it?
3
311