Annoying False Doctrines — the Series

The false doctrine I find annoying is that capitalism is the Lord’s economic plan and that it is better than any other plan that we have been given. False. The Lord’s economic plan is the Law of Consecration where we work and use our talent to build up each other, and for our efforts we receive that which we need, which is not necessarily what we want. It is where we are not concerned with the buildup of material thing, but ensuring that the basic needs of all are met so they can focus on the higher things in life, like spirituality. I guess I feel today that so many of us have our hearts set too much upon the things of this world and in many ways, like the Puritan forefathers. we equate having wealth as a sign of God’s approval for us. So this notion of Capitalism being God’s economic plan and equating wealth with Heavenly Father’s approval is overblown.

It isn’t false at all.

Just look at sisters Monson, Eyring and Utchdorf, they’re all ugly! And they are ugly because their husbands didn’t serve missions! Truth be told.

2. Anon

Now that was just wrong.

Having been spiritual missionaries, of course they are attracted to (and attract) spiritual hotties. That is, their wives are hot in a spiritual way. Sisters Monson, Eyring, and Utchdorf probably meet that description.

I was a hard-working missionary and my wife is a certified hottie. Spirtually and physically.

I never really thought the “work hard, get hot wife” was actually believed by anyone to be “doctrine”. Do people really believe this to be true. Anytime I heard it, it was in a joking manner, even on my mission. People can get pretty twisted though.

False Doctrine: Not even Jesus knows when the Second Coming will be.

Why false? Because the glorified, resurrected Jesus is God, and as such he is omniscient. It’s absurd to think that he can see before and after the Second Coming, but there’s black-out dates that he just can’t figure out.

Those who teach this false doctrine rely on scriptures from before Christ’s resurrection, back when Christ was not omniscient.

False Doctrine: Alma teaches that faith is like a seed.

Why false? Alma teaches that the word of God is like a seed. However, Jesus taught that (1) faith, and (2) the kingdom of heavean are like a mustard seed.

Yeah, the hot wife one is absurd.

Generals in the war in heaven.

Only men can say the invocation in Sacrament Meeting.

Those two really bother me.

“the better missionary you were, the hotter your wife will be” It just struck me that this is essentially what the 9/11 bombers reportedly were told, but substitute “72 virgins” for “hot wife.”

Speaking as one of the hot wives who was also a damn fine missionary, I don’t think I ever heard this bit of false doctrine. It sounds a bit more like “worst BYU pickup lines ever,” which would be another great series. Hmmm.

Oh, and that the husband has to be consulted to give the wife a calling but not the other way around.

How can it be doctrine if I can’t find it in my scriptures?

I have been a member all my life, and have never heard any of these. Are we going to the same church? It seems a far cry to classify any of these as “doctrine” – even if false. So there are people that actually believe these things and teach them to others?

Mark -
We do have a living prophet and revelation as well. Although I think you would have a hard time finding any of these taught by the prophet.

Yeah, I think I agree with those who said that the “hot wife” thing isn’t actually doctrine even in a watered-down sense. Anyone I’ve ever heard say that was just joking. I don’t think anyone takes it seriously.

I think the real “false doctrines” that bother me are actually… well, just false traditions I guess. Here’s a question (if someone can answer it for me)… what’s the source of the idea that we must take the sacrament with our right hand? I never know if that’s the result of actual general authority statements in the past?

Just calling in LDS today!

Weird topic this thread. Never heard the hot wife thing. Maybe because I am the hot wife who didn’t marry the RM. No guarantees folks.

The right hand for the sacrament thing comes from some GA with too much time on his (right) hand. It is absurd – as is the idea that all the deacons have to stand exactly the same way as the pass the sacrament.

Fwiw, the “false doctrines” title can get messy, since we often conflate “doctrine” and “custom” and “practice” and “general stupidity” when we say “false doctrine”.

If we were talking about “real” false doctrine (as in things that get taught actively by more than just a handful of obvious nutjobs), I would add:

1) The general reliance on the “unwritten order of things” to justify whatever a local leader wants to do;

2) The idea that every word that comes out of an apostle’s mouth is the perfect will of God;

3) That our situation in this life was determined prior to our birth due to our righteousness there. (That’s the one I hate the most.)

I could think of others, but that’s enough for now. (I would add a couple more, but I don’t want to create the unavoidable and vitriolic pissing contest that would ensue if I dared to mention a couple of controversial topics.)

Taco Breath, if you are going to convince us you are the hot wife, you’ll need a new handle.

Jacob is braver than I, since I had the exact same thought – or at least was struck by the conflicting images.

I think this is less false doctrine and more self-fulfilling prophecy. By what standard is the “hotness” measured? I think that if the returned missionary was less than the most diligent, his definition and criteria for “hotness” will possibly differ from those missionaries who gave themselves completely to their work. And of course, the less-valiant missionary still probably feels he qualifies as one of the stalwart elect, while the truly great missionary probably focuses on how he could have done better. Ironically, both probably get what they want (and feel they deserve).

“Although I think you would have a hard time finding any of these taught by the prophet.” That would sure increase the ratings for Gen Conf, though!

Arthur – “what’s the source of the idea that we must take the sacrament with our right hand?” In all seriousness, I believe this comes from the “right-hand” preference in cultures that traditionally clean their bottoms with only the left hand. As a result, handshakes are all right-handed and any contact with other people, out of courtesy, is only done with the right hand. Eating communal food is only done with the right hand. So, now you have much more to worry about than just double-dipping of chips!

1. The bishop’s wife who told me that you never go to the temple and see a beater car in the parking lot because if you’re worthy of a temple recommend, then you’re blessed with material wealth (think I might have mentioned that one here before);

2. The bishop’s counselor who said (rather self-servingly) that only people in leadership positions become exalted because this life is where we get the leadership experience needed for the hereafter;

3. The ward members who told me when I was in high school that I needed to do well in Chemistry class so that I would know how to make my own worlds when I become a god.

Three more items for my ever-growing list of “member teachings” to ignore for the sake of my sanity.

Some of us CAN’T take the sacrament with our right hands simply because our right hands are sore, having been extremely busy until 2:30 AM.

#19. Eww.

#21. Eww? Wha?

I think Chip works the night shift at a bottling factory doing bottle inspections. I hear that can get tiring.

I can see I am the only one who is outraged that primary teachers everywhere are teaching our impressionable children that Alma said faith is like a seed. Come on! This is outrageous!

*slapping forehead*

“Oh, and that the husband has to be consulted to give the wife a calling but not the other way around.”

I think that this is a “false, false doctrine”, as I’ve witnessed otherwise more often then not.

Nazenail – maybe this one should be under a separate thread of ‘annoying traditions perpetuated by old folks at church.’

Keep the commandments, prosper in the land.

I actually hate any absolute but that one comes to mind because it is so prevalent in BoM.

#27 – Holden, fwiw, that one means something very different on a communal level than it does on an individual level. I have no problem at all with it at the communal level; it is the individual level interpretation that I consider to be false doctrine.

Terry,

Terry, I can’t believe someone actually told you that you don’t see beaters in the temple parking lot. I mean seriously what about all those stories you hear about of families who sacrtifice their whole lives to go to the temple. If this where really true, then by default because they are worthy to go to the temple that they should be blessed with a lexus to get there.

Yeah, Lawna, that kind of blew me away as well. It should be pointed out that the person in question and her husband were very well-off. I find that most of those “member teachings” are largely self-serving, meant to either build up or justify those making the comments rather tnan to communicate any light or knowledge. LDS psychologist John Turpin has identified member teachings as one of the most prominent sources of stress in the LDS community, and I believe it; they do very little good, and only lead people to feel worse about themselves or to judge others.

#31 – Amen. I like the phrase “member teachings”.

Gee, I’m going to have to work hard to come up with a topic for the next in this series.

I was always under the impression you were to pray to know who your wife or husband would be. When I asked how I would know my wife; I was told. When I met her we went on one date and we were married one week later. She wasn’t ugly, but I never would have picked her. Well not fifteen years ago. Heavenly Father always knows what is better for us.

KingofTX: “She wasn’t ugly, but I never would have picked her.” I’m sorry, sir, but that comment gets you sent to the doghouse. http://bewareofthedoghouse.com/VideoPage.aspx

We are 35 posts in and no mention of the über evil coke product??

#36, Anne, that’s just what I was thinking of. I went to Japan on the mission and the members consider Cola beverages absolutely on par with coffee, tea, alcohol etc. One of our investigators bought a Coke at a branch bowling party and the members commented to me that we needed to re-teach the word of wisdom before he was baptized.

Hawk, I loved that video, but it really lost some punch in the end when it turned out to be another shameless plug for diamonds.

Holy crapoly, people, I have never heard of the “hot wife” doctrine or most of the rest of these. I guess the rest of you mormons are a lot weirder than I thought.

AdamF – In my defense, I don’t have patience to watch entire vid clips, so I missed that. Short attention span due to drinking too much Diet Coke.

E – “I have never heard of the “hot wife” doctrine” Maybe if you had just been a better missionary . . .

Uh… “The better missionary you were, the hotter your wife will be” is not false doctrines, it is a stupid joke. You need to adjust your sense of humor!

I’ve never heard the “hot wife prophecy” as anything other than a good-natured joke meant to make you feel better about slogging through a rain-filled day without an umbrella. However, Anon, just because I’ve never heard it said in seriousness doesn’t mean that it might not be taken seriously by some! Some people in the Church still believe that the lost 10 tribes are in a hidden location somewhere waiting to be found (as opposed to what most people seem to think, which is that they’re spread among some/all of the nationalities of the world). You can’t just say “That’s just the basis for a silly 70s scifi television series” because some people actually believe in it – even if you’ve never met them.

Speaking of other tribes, I’d add the “literal adoption” theory – this is the one where, upon baptism/patriarchal blessing a person without any real Israelite ancestors has their blood literally changed so that they have Israelite tribal blood. I haven’t heard it for years, but when I was younger I heard it a lot, usually accompanied by the “Native Americans get lighter skin through baptism or birth in the covenant” ‘doctrine’.

I’ve heard this over the pulpit WAY too many times:

“Jesus said: ‘I never said it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it’.”

I’m sad to report, one time it was a Bishop…

Anyway, I’m proof that one can be a mediocre missionary and still get a hot wife.

Actually, I think this brings up a good point.

Member theories of doctrine ARE a huge point of stress. I currently teach Elder’s Quorum, and it is very tempting to inject my own thoughts into the lesson beyond what is written or available. I resist this strongly. Why? Because it’s not appropriate. If I find myself straying into that territory, I ALWAYS preface it with the disclaimer that it is NOT doctrine, but my own thoughts. BUt I still worry that someone will take it as more–and that’s a huge concern for me.

As for the ‘valiant missionary==hot wife’ idiocy, all I have to say is this: as a guy, the most important thing in attracting the partner you want is being confident and successful. Other qualities help too, but if you have those, then you will likely find a marriage partner that makes you happy. Odd that those qualities are likely to make you a successful missionary as well. That said, it has zilch to do with the societal perceptions of attractiveness in your marriage partner. That’s a bunch of nonsense. One of the MOST successful men I know (millionaire+) has a wife who cannot easily be considered physically attractive. But she’s an awesome person, and they are both very good people. Did he marry well? Absolutely. Would the world agree that she’s ‘hot’? No way. Of course, he must find something attractive about her..they’ve got 14 kids. (That said, I don’t know what she looked like BEFORE they had 14 kids….)–but looking at their daughters I can guess that she still wouldn’t have met Cosmopolitan’s ‘hot’ standards. Oh well. On the other hand, I doubt that any of their daughters will have a terribly difficult time getting married either.

I would be hard pressed to describe this as a doctrine. More like stuff missionaries tell themselves and each other for motivation while serving.

I suspect that there is a correlation between a (male) missionary’s success and the hotness of the wife he will marry. The reason, however, would be biological rather than spiritual. People seek mates that maximize reproductive success. Thus, women are attracted to men who have traits that would indicate that they would make good fathers and providers. Theses traits would include a positive attitude, physical strength, ability to commit, reasonable attractiveness, intelligence, ability to manage social relationships and to influence others, and the willingness and ability to work. These traits would be associated with successful missionaries. Men are attracted to women who display traits associated with reproductive success including symmetric and properly proportioned facial features (possible indicators of health and lack of parasites), hips proportioned to carry a fetus to term, and adequately sized and symmetric mammary glands. These traits would be associated with female hotness. Thus, it would follow that men and women showing these traits would have more choice in choosing potential mates. This is only a hypothesis and would require more than anecdotal evidence to verify. I could image several such studies that could be conducted, perhaps by a BYU grad student.

A male returned missionary, however, who would tell a potential mate that because he was a hard working missionary he deserves to marry her would be demonstrating traits that hinder reproductive success. That is, he is demonstrating that he is stupid and lacks the ability to manage social relationships and to influence others. Unless he changes, he will be a biological failure — a reproductive dead end, e.g. an aging single man. Although this hypothesis may be more difficult to verify scientifically, there is ample anecdotal evidence of this.

For the record, although I have a wife who was and is still is hot (having ample indicators of reproductive success), I was somewhat of slacker as a missionary.

How about the “If a missionary isn’t valiant, they may miss finding those spirits they were foreordained to teach . . . .”

The ones I find most annoying are related:

The prophet is not infallible, but we should follow him even if he makes a mistake.
OR
The prophet is not infallible, but the Lord would intervene before he ever made a mistake.

Like most of this thread, I recognize that these are not “doctrines”, but I would say they are common enough beliefs that I hear them at least once a month at church.

Lots of mission-related stuff, I see. Ever hear this one? “You will never rise above the level of your performance on your mission” (Failure on your mission=failure throughout the rest of your life and into eternity)

Fortunately, Elder Dean L. Larsen strongly refuted that manipulative nonsense.

http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6944

This is a great thread. Very enjoyable. But I am beginning to think we should list the true doctrines because there are a lot less of them apparrently!

My favs (in addition to all the ones listed)

1. The doctrine of the white shirt
2. The doctrine of the must be more valiant facial hairless Priesthood Holder!

OK, my biggest pet peeve is the belief that some have that pedigreed members are more righteous than converts or less pedigreed. Like many of these types of beliefs, it’s pretty self-serving among those who hold it, like the wealthy bishop’s wife saying there are no poor people in the temple.

Annoying false doctrine: the conflation of doctrine with truth. Doctrine simply means what is taught.

Example:

Friend: “Hey, that’s not Church doctrine!”
Me: “Why do you say that?”
Friend: “Because it’s not true!”
Me: “But the president of the Church TAUGHT it! Doesn’t that make it doctrine, at least historically?”
Friend (scratches head, looks pained):”But it’s not in the standard works, and it was only taught a few times, so it’s not doctrine!”
Me: (scratching head, looks pained) “It doesn’t make a difference whether it’s true or not, it’s whether it was taught or not!”

If I find myself straying into that territory, I ALWAYS preface it with the disclaimer that it is NOT doctrine, but my own thoughts. BUt I still worry that someone will take it as more–and that’s a huge concern for me.

I also issue a disclaimer, but do not worry in the least that somebody will still mistake my opinions for doctrine. Much more likely that they will reflexively dismiss anything nonscriptural that is believed by Br. Lemming as nonsense.

“The doctrine of the white shirt”. Which doctrine you are referring to, Jeff? There are a couple. I have found (testify?) the doctrine of “don’t wear a white shirt to church, never get a demanding calling” is generally true, thankfully.

“You will never be happier than you are on your mission”.

I remember being asked if I believed that on my mission by an AP in front of a large group of elders. It was prefaced by “The mission president believes it is true, do you Elder?” The putzy, 19 year old nerd that I was answered a meek “yes” all the while inside, I’m thinking “I sure as hell hope not.”

you will never be happier … … my first mission president said that anyone who said that after they were married deserved to have his wife hit him

#58 – . . . every night, with a frying pan, alternating between the head and the lower abdominal region.

#48 Old Man Ron, I’m appalled at your list of the good qualities of men vs. women. Men get rated by you for qualities of character, women for qualities of appearance only in your estimation. How is that better than judging someone by the color of their skin? Women actually do have qualities like intelligence, kindliness, courage, energy, faithfulness, work ethic, humor, strength, fortitude, and so on, that make much more difference on their suitability as a life partner than their appearance. I think it’s deeply regrettable how much focus our society puts on women’s appearance to the exclusion of more important character traits. There’s a terrible danger in such societies of “trust(ing) the servile womb to breed free men”. Remember that sons tend to inherit all their mother’s traits, not just her appearance. Things like determination and intelligence are not sex-linked. I’m appalled and repelled that in your list, women are judged similarly to the way one might choose a horse or prize bull.

I’m in New Orleans, being snowed on. Thanks for brightening up my day with these comments.

Tatiana – in Old Man Ron’s defense (there’s a sentence I’ve never strung together before) studies indicate the men seek mates based on those physical properties (symmetrical face, waist to hip ratio, etc.) and women judge men based on their ability to provide. That’s just biological. But a recent article that was published questioned the desirable female mating characteristics and pointed out that it was contradicted by science: in fact, hip to waist ratio was not a very good indicator of fertility. In these kind of studies, I wonder which comes first, the theory or the conclusion.

New false doctrine.Brother/Sister, just pay your tithes and all will be OK. Yes it will but sometimes it takes time.

#63 – How did I overlook that one? Paying tithing is NOT a guarantee of no financial worries or stress or need for assistance. Ooh, I hate that one.

Hawkrrrl,

“Speaking as one of the hot wives who was also a damn fine missionary, I don’t think I ever heard this bit of false doctrine”

They just never tell the ladies about that one!

……………….

Some of the points here aren’t doctrines but just policies and practices. For example the white shirts, no beards for bishops and men doing the first prayer in sacrament are things the authorities push as unwritten rules but not scripture based gospel doctrine. I don’t know why, maybe they want uniformity across the church.

Another is the asking the husband for a calling for the wife but not the other way around. But its good management practice due to some men objecting to another man interviewing their wife without him knowing why, some don’t care off course or [better] trust their wife but one comes across husbands in church who do object. So its always smarter to mention that one will interview the wife for a calling in primary or whatever to gauge what the husband will do, if he will support her or be annoyed and make his entire family inactive.

When a man is called bishop or other highly visible calling you can be sure that the wife will be consulted too and permission sought but it usually doesn’t happen for quorum callings or other auxiliary callings, true.

Tatiana and hawkgrrl – I agree that my list is appalling, but as hawkgrrl pointed out, some studies show these results. If we remain natural men and women, we will act consistent with these studies. I am troubled, however, by many of the folk doctrines in this post that suggest that our material success, be it the hotness of our wife or the size of our car in the temple parking lot, is a reflection of our inner faith and spiritual qualities. This is often suggested even by our leaders. “The Lord has demonstrated throughout the generations that when the inhabitants of the earth remember him and are obedient to his direction, he will bless them not only with spiritual blessings, but with material abundance as well.” Dean L. Larson, President of the Seventy, Ensign, November 1992, p. 40. Because of these statements and some of the discussions of the pride cycle in Book of Mormon, many LDS members seem to be social or spiritual Darwinists who believe that prosperity is a result and a proof of being the most spiritually fit and deserving. Moreover, poverty and suffering is a reflection of sin. Thus, the hotness of our wife and the size of our car and our house are tokens and signs of our worthiness.

Of course, as the Book of Mormon makes clear, when we ascribe to ourselves a righteousness because of our wealth or success, we move into the another part of the pride cycle. “The people of the church began to wax proud, because of their exceeding riches, and their fine silks, and their fine-twined linen, and because of their many flocks and herds, and their gold and their silver, and all manner of precious things, which they had obtained by their industry; and in all these things were they lifted up in the pride of their eyes.” Alma 4:6. The real problem seems to be, not that these folk doctrines are true or false, but that we believe they are true and act in accordance with this belief rather than viewing ourselves as “less than the dust of the earth.” Mosiah 4:2; Hel. 12:7.

One other thing, if I add Tatiana list of “intelligence, kindliness, courage, energy, faithfulness, work ethic, humor, strength, fortitude” to the definition of hotness, my wife is super-hot — but I am still a slacker.

I am surprised that no one has brought up any “doctrines” related to polygyny/monogamy. Here are some of my favorites:

Marriage is between one man and one woman.

Plural marriage will lead to longer life and better health.

Monogamy was at the root of the fall of the Roman empire, and is responsible for abortion, infantacide, prostitution, and divorce.

Monogamy has always been the standard of the church.

Plural marriage is the only way to reach the highest exaltation.

The manifesto ended plural marriage.

I recognized that not all of these are currently held by members of the church. But they’ve all been taught at some point in the history of the church.

#65 I have never seen the prayer thing being practiced in France. This would sound really weird to members if they were told that men should give the opening prayer in sacrament meeting.

I have been taught about half of the false doctrines I have read on there. This is mainly because: a) my mom was a single mom and very close to the missionaries age (who were all from large mormon families from Utah). b) My mom loved to hang out with people who just worshiped the sacred soil of Utah and held as holly any b*llsh*t as long as it was divine words coming from a member in SLC.

Anyway, one that has not been mentioned here and that may be a very french thing:
“You can lead a perfect life but if you sin just before you die you won’t get exalted (talk about pressure!)”

“The best way to double your income is to double your fast offering”

Of course not a doctrine but I heard an EQ President teach this in quorum as the most valuable lesson he learned on his mission from a companion of his.

Since I’m an accountant, I spent the next little while in quorum meeting figuring out how many times I would have to double my contributions to make my income the size of our country’s Gross National Product. It wasn’t very many years and my income wasn’t very much……

HawkGrrrl I deserve the doghouse, but I would never say that to my wife.

The symmetry you are talking about is based on the Fibonacci Numbers and the Golden Section or Phi. http://goldennumber.net/beauty.htm

If you pray hard enough, God will give you a baby.

If you have more faith, God will give you a baby.

Cannot tell you how many times I (an infertile woman) have heard that.

It’s freakin’ ridiculous.

My DH’s ex-GF said that on her mission in Italy one of the branches had a rule that women could not touch the sacrament tray. The sister missionaries all worked together to ensure there was no alternative, positioning themselves at the end of the rows with no male hands in reach of the end of the aisle. That ended that practice.

KoTX – glad to hear you wouldn’t say it to your wife!

#35 http://bewareofthedoghouse.com/VideoPage.aspx

I always tell my wife that her mum is hot, as she will be when she’s her age. That’s ok, isn’t it??

I think those studies are messed up. Whenever people set about to study things like this, as evidenced by a long string of studies proving Asians and Africans inferior to Europeans in the 18th and 19th centuries, their biases so take over the science that little to no real truth can leak through. Individual variation in every trait that is supposedly sexually dimorphic is so wide and overlap between men and women so great that it makes practically no sense to discuss “the male brain” or “the female brain” yet people still do it. Always the conclusions bear out the stereotypes that society and the investigators want to believe.

Conclusion: Annoying false science is even more annoying than annoying false doctrines. =)

#75 – LOL.

This has really been entertaining. I can’t believe that nobody has mentioned these, although they might more aptly be titled Mormon Mythology.

BYU is the Lord’s University.

The Eurythmics song “Missionary Man” was because Dave Stewart met the missionaries. Steve Martin, Lionel Richie, etc etc.

Yeah, Lionel Richie was Mormon, apparently, until he cheated on his wife. I always thought that was funny – especially given the lyrics of at least a couple of his songs.

As to the Book of Mormon statement that the obedient will prosper in the land. The obedient inherit the Celestial Kingdom. So it IS true that they will finally and eternally “prosper in the land”. If someone is thinking that the statement has reference to other “prosperings” they may find disappointment sooner or later.

#71 :lol. There is a sister in my ward who has been diagnoticed with a brain tumor last week. This young a cute man going on a mission to California at the end of this month actually wrote to her on a card that if she has faith enough she will heal. I wanted to rip off his eye balls from his face but then I realized that it would just made him more blind and that he is just 19 after all. So I refrained.

Amongst all those false doctrines/myths is the one that you hear from some members that if you are wearing your garments you can’t be hurt.

Yeah, heard that one before newbie, good point!

Yep, many members have this myth that the Bishop is the one who can guide them through everything. No, bishops are not trained as Marriage counsellors,
Financial counsellors,(this one is for you Amused
Dec 12th, 2008 at 12:19 am) Bishops are spiritual leaders and as such can give spiritual counsel that may help in other matters like the ones already mentioned but get help from the right source, not aleways go to the Bishop.

Fun post. My personal least favorite: “Jesus was always cheerful/happy.” What the hell? Yeah, and he played hopscotch on the way to Golgotha… geez.

Has anyone thought that some of these false doctrines aren’t really false doctrines but lack of understanding of real doctrines?

True! But then they are taught as doctrines and don’t you dare thinking out loud that things may have been a little different.
I had a great experience about placing people out of there comfort zone last sunday.
One of the counselor of the bishop wanted to set me up for a talk for each sunday next year while some other members just wanted to cut my head off.

Interesting… I have read at least 1 to 1.5 things here called false doctrine, that are not false. You might want to look a little closer before you condemn…

Everything on this page is False Doctrine.

Remember “LET EVERY MAN BE A LIAR, and GODS WORD BE TRUTH”.
There is only one God and one Bible.

Peace out !